https://www.orthopaedicmanipulation.com/author/tahaabdelrahman/#google_vignette

Dr Abdelrahman Taha, السويس, Suez (2026)

31/01/2026

Clinical Case Report: Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain with Movement Coordination Deficit

💥 Patient Overview
- Demographics: 29-year-old male, Engineer.
- Chief Complaint: Chronic low back pain (LBP) persisting for approximately one year, with recent exacerbation over the last 3-4 weeks.
- Mechanism of Injury: Symptoms are primarily driven by sustained sedentary postures, specifically prolonged sitting at a computer.

💥 Clinical Presentation & Assessment
The patient reports central low back pain that occasionally radiates to the buttocks (Right > Left).
- Pain Characteristics: Intermittent paresthesia in the lower back and buttock region. Pain is aggravated by sitting, standing, and transitions (e.g., getting into a car), and is notably worse upon waking or turning in bed.
- Functional Status:
- Oswestry Disability Index (ODI): 22% (Moderate Disability).
- Visual Analog Scale (VAS): Current pain at 5/10, peaking at 8/10.
- Imaging (MRI): Central disc protrusion at L4-L5 with straightening of the lumbar curve.
- Physical Exam Findings:
1) Positive Slump test on the right.
2) Apprehension during flexion and suspected lumbar instability.
3) Favorable response to extension-based movements (Prone on elbows, EIL).
4) DN4 Score: 4/10, indicating a neuropathic component to the pain.
5) Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI): 18/100 (Subclinical levels).

💥 Diagnosis & Clinical Reasoning
The patient presents with Chronic Discogenic Pain (Extension-biased) accompanied by a Movement Coordination Deficit. The clinical picture suggests that while there is a structural component (disc protrusion), the primary drivers of disability are postural strain and a lack of dynamic stability during spinal loading. The neuropathic features (DN4=4) suggest the involvement of sensitized neural tissue, likely the L4/L5 nerve roots.

💥 Treatment Strategy
The management plan focuses on a "Directional Preference" approach combined with stabilization exercises.

💥 Key Takeaway for Clinicians: This case highlights the importance of differentiating between structural findings on an MRI and functional behavior. Despite the "Grade 2" disc protrusion, the patient’s favorable response to extension and subclinical sensitization scores suggest a high potential for recovery through targeted mechanical therapy and stability training rather than purely passive modalities.

31/01/2026

From Labels to Logic: Mastering Mechanistic Pain Descriptors in Clinical Practice

The shift toward personalized medicine in musculoskeletal rehabilitation isn't just a trend; it’s a clinical necessity. Moving beyond "where it hurts" to "why it hurts" requires a deep dive into the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms.
Understanding these descriptors allows us to move from a "one-size-fits-all" protocol to a mechanism-based management strategy.

💥 The Three Pillars of Pain Mechanisms
To tailor our interventions, we must distinguish between the three primary descriptors:

1- Nociceptive Pain: Arising from actual or threatened damage to non-neural tissue and is due to the activation of nociceptors. (e.g., acute inflammatory conditions).

2- Neuropathic Pain: Caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. (e.g., Radiculopathy or Carpal Tunnel Syndrome).

3- Nociplastic Pain: Pain that arises from altered nociception despite no clear evidence of actual or threatened tissue damage or evidence for a disease/lesion of the somatosensory system causing the pain. (e.g., Fibromyalgia or Central Sensitization).

💥 Clinical Takeaways for the Modern Physio

1) Tailored Management: Identifying the dominant mechanism (e.g., using neurodynamic sliders for neuropathic pain vs. graded exposure for nociplastic pain) can significantly improve patient outcomes.

2) The Nociplastic Pivot: Nociplastic pain provides an evidence-based framework to explain symptoms that lack clear pathology. It validates the patient's experience without needing "damage" as a prerequisite.

3) Holistic Precision: While descriptors guide our technical choices, the treatment must remain person-centered. We treat the individual, not just the mechanism.

4) Evidence-Informed: While we wait for more robust clinical trials targeting nociplastic pain specifically, using these descriptors today helps bridge the gap between research and the clinic.

💥 The Bottom Line
Precision in our terminology leads to precision in our treatment. By categorizing pain through a mechanistic lens, we move one step closer to truly personalized care.

31/01/2026

A patient presenting with symptoms consistent with spinal canal stenosis and neurogenic claudication

1. Patient Profile

- Name: Mohamed Helmy
- Age/Sex: 60-year-old Male
- Occupation: Retired teacher (previously required prolonged standing and walking)
- Chief Complaint: Bilateral lower limb numbness and low back pain, worsening since retirement and a decrease in general activity.

2. Subjective Assessment

✅Pain Profile

- Location: Low back, bilateral buttocks, bilateral thighs (left > right), and radiating to the toes.
- Nature: Electrical sensations, numbness, and sharp "stinging" pain when lifting.
- Intensity (VAS): Currently 8/10 with movement; best is 3/10 at rest.
- Duration: Chronic symptoms (>12 weeks), with a significant flare-up in the last 3–4 weeks.
Aggravating & Easing Factors
- Aggravating: Walking, prolonged standing, and specifically spinal extension (e.g., trying to stand up straight or getting up from sitting).
- Easing: Sitting, lying supine with the back supported, and maintaining a mid-range or flexed posture.

✅ Functional Impact (Oswestry Disability Index)

- Score: 26% (Moderate Disability).
- Key Limitations: Cannot stand for more than 30 minutes and has difficulty walking distances beyond 1.5 km.

3. Objective Findings & Clinical Screening

✅ Neuropathic & Sensitization Screening

- DN4 Questionnaire: 2/10 (Negative for purely neuropathic origin, though positive for numbness and touch sensitivity).
- Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI): 16/100 (Sub-clinical levels; indicates symptoms are likely driven by structural/mechanical issues rather than central nervous system over-excitability).

✅ Red Flag Screening
- Micturition: Patient reports urinary hesitancy (inability to void all at once, needing to go every five minutes).
- Sensation: Negative for saddle anesthesia.

💥 Note: While the patient lacks overt cauda equina syndrome, the urinary changes in a 60-year-old male with bilateral symptoms warrant close monitoring and potential urological referral to rule out prostate involvement or emerging neurological compression.

💥 Findings
(T2/T1-Weighted Interpretation"AI-based")

✅ Alignment and Bone Signal:
- There is evidence of Grade I degenerative anterolisthesis (forward slippage), likely at the L4-L5 level.
- Mild loss of lumbar lordosis is noted, consistent with the patient's antalgic flexion-biased posture.
- Vertebral body heights are preserved, but endplate changes (Modic Type II) are suggestive of chronic degenerative disc disease.

✅ Disc Levels:
- L1-L3: Mild disc desiccation with no significant canal narrowing.
- L3-L4: Moderate disc bulging combined with ligamentum flavum hypertrophy, contributing to early-stage central canal narrowing.
- L4-L5: Critical Level. Significant posterior disc protrusion and facet joint arthropathy. In combination with the slippage, this creates marked narrowing of the central spinal canal (Spinal Stenosis).
- L5-S1: Disc desiccation and moderate narrowing of the neural foramina, likely affecting the exiting L5 nerve roots.

✅ Soft Tissues and Neural Structures:
- Central Canal: Findings are consistent with Multilevel Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, most severe at the L4-L5 level.
- Thecal Sac: Compression of the thecal sac is visible, which correlates with the patient's reports of bilateral "electrical" sensations in the legs.
- Conus Medullaris: Terminates at a normal level (L1); no signal abnormality within the cord.

4. Clinical Reasoning & Hypotheses

- Directional Preference: The patient demonstrates a clear flexion preference. Symptoms are provoked by extension and eased by flexion (sitting/bending forward).

- Mechanical Diagnosis: Consistent with Neurogenic Claudication secondary to Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis. The "non-centralizing" nature of the pain suggests that while a preferred direction exists for symptomatic relief, the mechanical obstruction (likely degenerative stenosis visible on MRI) prevents the rapid abolition of distal symptoms often seen in simple disc derangements.

- Relevant Comorbidities: History of heavy smoking (Sh**ha) and reports of recent weight gain/inactivity since retirement.

30/01/2026

Rehab First: A Success Story in Hip Microinstability 🦵✨

Rehabilitation isn't just a "support" step—it is the gold standard for managing hip joint microinstability (MI).

I’m excited to share a compelling case report that reinforces why physical therapy should be the first-line treatment for patients facing this diagnosis. By focusing on neuromuscular control and joint stabilization, we helped a patient achieve full recovery and avoid invasive procedures.

This case highlights the power of a movement-first approach in modern orthopedics. It’s a reminder that with the right conservative strategy, we can restore function and get patients back to what they love.

💥 Gkey points in rehabilitation patients
with hip joint MI:

1• Understand the pathology.

2• Restrict excessive range of motion
and focus on movement quality.

3• Gradual increase in the load of selected
exercises.

23/01/2026

The Diagnostic Blind Spot: When Hip Pain Masks as Lower Leg Symptoms 🔍🦵

In the world of musculoskeletal diagnostics, we often talk about the "usual suspects" for referred pain. While we readily link hip pathology to the groin, buttock, or knee, we frequently stop at the joint line.

This clinical reality can lead to significant diagnostic delays—in some cases, up to 18 months—before the true source of lower limb pain is identified.

🚨 The "Below the Knee" Hidden Link
It is less commonly recognized that hip joint pathologies, such as Hip Osteoarthritis, can manifest as referred pain exclusively in the lower leg. Remarkably, this can occur even in the complete absence of pain in the hip, groin, back, or thigh.

💡 Key Clinical Learning Points
The Great Mimicker: Hip-referred pain can closely mimic Exertional Related Leg Pain (ERLP) or distal nerve entrapments, leading clinicians down the wrong diagnostic path.
- Broaden the Scope: Hip pathology should be a mandatory inclusion in your differential diagnosis for any unexplained lower leg complaints.
- The Screening Standard: A comprehensive physical exam for any lower limb issue must include a hip joint screening (range of motion, impingement tests, and joint loading).

🩺 Clinical Takeaway for Practitioners
Don't let a "silent" hip fool you. When the distal symptoms don't match the local clinical findings, look proximal. Incorporating a 2-minute hip screen can be the difference between a quick recovery and months of patient frustration.

23/01/2026

HVLAT Manipulations for Radiculopathy: Clinical Breakthrough or Cautionary Tale? 🦴⚖️

High-Velocity Low-Amplitude Thrust (HVLAT) manipulations are a staple in manual therapy, but their role in treating cervical, thoracic, and lumbar radiculopathy remains a subject of intense clinical debate.

A recent evaluation of the evidence highlights a nuanced "green light/yellow light" scenario for practitioners. Here is the breakdown:

🔍 The Findings: Short-Term Gains
Current data suggests that HVLAT manipulations may offer short-term improvements in both pain intensity and disability scores for patients suffering from cervical and lumbar radiculopathy when compared to standard control interventions.

⚠️ The Caveat: Proceed with Caution
While the immediate relief is promising, the clinical community remains cautious:
- Evidence Quality: Trials often exhibit significant methodological limitations, leading to a "limited" certainty of evidence.
- Consistency: Results are not yet consistent enough to guarantee efficacy across all patient profiles.
- The "Acute" Risk: Extra care is warranted during the acute phase of radiculopathy, where nerve irritability is at its peak.

💡 Clinical Implications for Best Practice
HVLAT should not be a standalone "silver bullet." Instead, clinicians should adopt a Multimodal Management Strategy:
- Prioritize Education: Help patients understand the nature of radiculopathy and recovery timelines.
- Strategic Application: Use HVLAT as a tool within a broader plan, rather than the sole intervention.
- Active Management: Balance manual techniques with therapeutic exercise and lifestyle modifications.

The Bottom Line: HVLAT can be a valuable asset for symptomatic relief, but clinical reasoning and patient safety must lead the way.

23/01/2026

Advancing Neuropathic Pain Management: A Comprehensive Multi-Modal Framework 🧠⚡

Neuropathic pain continues to be one of the most challenging "unmet needs" in modern medicine. While individual recommendations exist, the shift toward an integrated approach—combining pharmacotherapy, neurostimulation, and interventional techniques—is essential for improving patient outcomes.

Based on recent evidence-based clinical proposals, here is a structured breakdown of the current treatment landscape:

1st Line: The Foundation of Care
For general neuropathic pain, these interventions carry weak-to-strong recommendations for immediate implementation:
- SNRIs: Duloxetine & Venlafaxine
- Gabapentin
- Tricyclic Antidepressants (TCAs)
- Localized Peripheral Pain: Topical Lidocaine and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS).

2nd Line: Specialized & Combination Therapy
When first-line treatments provide insufficient relief, the focus shifts to targeted combinations and specialized topicals:
- Pharmacology: Pregabalin, Tramadol, or Combination Therapy (Antidepressants + Gabapentinoids).
- Localized Peripheral Pain: High-concentration Capsaicin patches and Botulinum Toxin A.
- Holistic Support: Psychotherapy (CBT and Mindfulness) is strongly recommended as an add-on therapy at this stage to address the psychological burden of chronic pain.

3rd Line: Advanced Interventions & Refractory Cases
Reserved for complex or treatment-resistant cases, including Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) or Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy:
- Neurostimulation: High-frequency rTMS (Motor Cortex) and Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS).
- Opioids: Strong opioids are considered only as a last resort in the absence of clinical alternatives.

💥 The Takeaway for Clinicians
The future of neuropathic pain management lies in multidisciplinary synergy. By moving beyond a "pills-only" mindset and integrating neurostimulation and behavioral health early, we can better address the complex pathology of the nervous system.

20/01/2026

Neck Pain Isn't Just "Wear and Tear" | A Clinical Red Flag Case 🚩

As physical therapists, we often see patients with chronic neck pain attributed to age-related degeneration. However, a recent case highlights the critical importance of looking beyond the X-ray to ensure we aren't missing a life-threatening diagnosis.

- The Case Study
A 65-year-old male was referred to PT for chronic neck pain. His radiographs showed moderate to severe cervical degeneration—a common finding in this age group. However, the physical examination revealed a crucial triad:
• Limited spinal range of motion.
• Negative neurological screening.
• Non-musculoskeletal symptoms: The patient was experiencing dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and hoarseness.
While the spinal degeneration explained the stiffness, the throat-related symptoms pointed toward something more systemic.

💥 Critical Learning Points for Clinicians
1- Look Beyond the Image: Radiographs showing "wear and tear" can be a red herring. Always correlate imaging with the clinical history.
2- The "Red Flag" Combo: Dysphagia and hoarseness in a neck pain patient are significant indicators for potential head or neck cancers. These require an immediate referral for further diagnostic testing.
3- PTs as First-Line Screeners: We provide the highest value when we act as a "safety net." Our ability to recognize non-musculoskeletal patterns is what maximizes patient safety and improves long-term outcomes.
4- Timing is Everything: In oncology, a delay in referral is a delay in treatment. Recognizing the need for medical consultation early can literally be life-saving.

- The Bottom Line
Our role isn't just to move joints; it's to screen the whole person. When a patient’s symptoms don't "fit" the mechanical pattern, trust your clinical intuition and refer out.

20/01/2026

Clinical Insight: When "Sciatica" Isn’t Coming from the Spine

It’s a common clinical trap: a patient presents with radiating leg pain, a history of disc degeneration, and a previous diagnosis of sciatica. But what happens when the clinical picture doesn't quite add up?

- The Case at a Glance
A 44-year-old female was referred to physical therapy for right-sided sciatica and L5-S1 degenerative disc disease. Her symptoms included hip pain radiating to the foot and—crucially—progressive calf cramping.

- The Red Flags
Despite the lumbar imaging findings, the physical therapy evaluation revealed inconsistencies. By diving deeper into the patient’s comorbidities and medication history, the therapist suspected Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) rather than a neurological issue.

- The Outcome
Following ACR imaging guidelines, the patient was referred for an arterial ultrasound. This interdisciplinary pivot ensured the patient received vascular intervention for a condition that is frequently misdiagnosed as musculoskeletal.

💥 Key Takeaways for Clinicians
👉 Look Beyond the Imaging: Just because a scan shows a bulging disc doesn't mean it’s the source of the pain. Clinical reasoning must bridge the gap between "pictures" and "presentation."
👉 The Power of History: A thorough review of past medical history and medications is often where the real diagnosis hides.
👉 Collaborate Early: When findings are inconsistent, referring to specialists (like vascular surgery) isn't just "good practice"—it's life-changing for the patient.

Vascular health is often the "great masquerader" in orthopedic settings. Staying vigilant ensures we treat the cause, not just the label.

18/01/2026

🦵 Buttock Pain: Is it Neural, Orthopedic, or Vascular?

For physical therapists, differential diagnosis of hip and buttock pain often centers on lumbar spine pathology or hip joint degeneration. However, a rare but critical vascular mimic is buttock claudication caused by isolated internal iliac artery (IIA) stenosis.

🔍 Clinical Red Flags for Vascular Origin
Distinguishing vascular buttock claudication from neurogenic or orthopedic issues can be challenging. Key diagnostic insights include:

- Ischemic Pattern: Pain is specifically triggered by walking and disappears upon rest.

- Normal Initial Screening: Distal pulses may be present, and standard non-invasive vascular tests (like ABI) may appear normal or only slightly decreased after exercise.

- Ineffective Conserative Care: Symptoms persist despite normal radiographs of the hip or spine and a lack of response to typical musculoskeletal interventions.

- Collateral Failure: While the pelvic arterial network is robust, symptoms emerge if these collaterals are compromised or insufficiently developed.

🩺 Diagnostic & Treatment Pathways
If a vascular origin is suspected but Duplex sonography is inconclusive (as it often is for the IIA), MR-angiography or conventional arteriography is required to secure the diagnosis.

The primary medical intervention is Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA). Case studies show that successful balloon angioplasty or stenting can lead to the immediate and total disappearance of incapacitating buttock pain.

18/01/2026

Facetogenic LBP 🕵️

In some studies, 5–15% of people with chronic LBP are believed to have disease of one or more facet joints that are contributing to their pain (van Kleef, et al., 2010).

Revel et al. in 1998 found that people with pain of facet joint origin were characterised by:
- being aged > 65 years
- pain that is well relieved by recumbency
- absence of pain exacerbation
1) by coughing
2) by forward flexion
3) when rising from flexion
4) by hyperextension
5) by extension rotation.

All predicted a benefit from injection of anaesthetic into facet joints. The presence of five of these characteristics, including pain on recumbency, correctly identified 92% of responders and 80% of non-responders (Revel et al., 1998). Others, however, were unable to replicate their findings (Laslett et al., 2004). Subsequent reviews suggest that 62% of those with these clinical features of facet joint pain obtained immediate relief from FJIs; one-third of these were false positives (Hooten et al., 2005; Sharma et al., 2012).

Laslett et al. in 2006 found that seven factors were predictive of facet joint pain:

1. age ≥ 50 years
2. pain is best when walking
3. pain is best when sitting
4. onset of pain is paraspinal
5. modified somatic perceptions questionnaire score exceeding 13 (suggesting a somatisation disorder)
6. positive extension/rotation test
7. absence of centralisation during repeated movement testing.

They found that presence of three or more factors of age ≥ 50 years, pain is best when walking, pain is best when sitting, onset of pain is paraspinal and positive extension/rotation test was 85% sensitive and 91% specific for facet joint pain (Laslett et al., 2006).

In a 2007 systematic review, Hancock et al. did not find evidence for a robust diagnostic test for facet joint pain. In a retrospective chart review (n = 170), DePalma et al. (2011) found that the presence of isolated paramidline LBP increased the probability of facet or sacroiliac joint dysfunction and slightly reduced the likelihood of lumbar disc degeneration. The sensitivity of reporting paramidline pain if the patient has facet joint pain was 96% [95% confidence interval (CI) 83% to 99.4%] for sacroiliac pain and 67% for internal disc disruption. This supports other work indicating that paraspinal or paramidline pain
is a clinical indicator of possible facet joint involvement.

A 2007 consensus study (Wilde et al., 2007) identified clinical features thought to be associated with facet joint pain, such as:
- localised unilateral LBP
- lack of radicular features
- pain eased in flexion
- pain, if referred, is above the knee
- palpation: local unilateral passive movement shows reduced range of motion or increased stiffness on the side of pain
- unilateral muscle spasm over the affected facet joint
- pain in extension
- pain in extension, lateral flexion or rotation to the ipsilateral side.

In a prospective cohort study of medial branch blocks for suspected lumbar or cervical facet pain, Wasan et al. (2009) used selection criteria including a history of axial pain with radiation in an established facet joint referral pattern and tests for facet joint loading signs (extension, side bending and rotation). Although they acknowledged that their study was not designed to confirm diagnosis, Wasan et al. (2009) concluded that the selection criteria reduced the likelihood of radicular pain due to nerve root involvement or non-specific LBP.

In the 2011 protocol for a trial of specific physiotherapy compared with advice, Hahne et al. (2011) argued that if three or more of the following factors are present then there is facet joint dysfunction:

- unilateral LBP
- pain reproduced with lumbar extension and ipsilateral lateral-flexion movements
- pain on ipsilateral passive postero-anterior accessory movement applied through the transverse process or zygapophyseal joint at one or two segments
- improvement in pain or range of movement following a ‘mini-treatment’ of manual therapy directed at the zygapophyseal joint.

The choices of Hahne et al. are grounded in the Maitland’s clinical reasoning approach to identifying a group who would respond to manual therapy (Ford et., 2011). The use of such phenotypically defined subgroups, grounded on clinical reasoning, may be the most appropriate approach to subgroup identification in LBP (Underwood et al., 2011) This approach has not been tested empirically and may not be directly relevant to identifying people likely to respond to facet joint injections.

References:
- van Kleef M, Vanelderen P, Cohen SP, Lataster A, Van Zundert J, Mekhail N. 12. Pain originating
from the lumbar facet joints. Pain Pract 2010;10:459–69.
- Revel M, Poiraudeau S, Auleley GR, Payan C, Denke A, Nguyen M, et al. Capacity of the clinical
picture to characterize low back pain relieved by facet joint anesthesia. Proposed criteria to
identify patients with painful facet joints. Spine 1998;23:1972–6.
- Laslett M, Oberg B, Aprill CN, McDonald B. Zygapophysial joint blocks in chronic low back pain: a test of Revel’s model as a screening test. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2004;5:43.
- Hooten WM, Martin DP, Huntoon MA. Radiofrequency neurotomy for low back pain:
evidence-based procedural guidelines. Pain Med 2005;6:129–38.
- Sharma H, Duggan S, Nazir J, Andrews J, Fender D, Sanderson P, et al. Setting ‘diagnostic
reference levels’ for fluoroscopy-guided spinal procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012;94–B(Suppl. X):118.
- Laslett M, McDonald B, Aprill CN, Tropp H, Oberg B. Clinical predictors of screening lumbar
zygapophyseal joint blocks: development of clinical prediction rules. Spine J 2006;6:370–9.
- Hancock MJ, Maher CG, Latimer J, Spindler MF, McAuley JH, Laslett M, Bogduk N. Systematic
review of tests to identify the disc, SIJ or facet joint as the source of low back pain. Eur Spine J
2007;16:1539–50.
- DePalma MJ, Ketchum JM, Trussell BS, Saullo TR, Slipman CW. Does the location of low back
pain predict its source? PM R 2011;3:33–9.
- Wilde VE, Ford JJ, McMeeken JM. Indicators of lumbar zygapophyseal joint pain: survey of an
expert panel with the Delphi technique. Phys Ther 2007;87:1348–61.
- Wasan AD, Jamison RN, Pham L, Tipirneni N, Nedeljkovic SS, Katz JN. Psychopathology predicts the outcome of medial branch blocks with corticosteroid for chronic axial low back or cervical pain: a prospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2009;10:22.
- Ford J, Thompson S, Hahne A. A classification and treatment protocol for low back disorders:
part 1 – specific manual therapy. Phys Ther Rev 2011;16:168–77.
- Underwood M, Mistry D, Lall R, Lamb S. Predicting response to a cognitive-behavioral approach to treating low back pain: secondary analysis of the BeST data set. Arthritis Care Res2011;63:1271–9.

Dr Abdelrahman Taha

31/01/2026

31/01/2026

31/01/2026

30/01/2026

23/01/2026

23/01/2026

23/01/2026

20/01/2026

20/01/2026

18/01/2026

18/01/2026

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Practice

Shortcuts

Share

Category