Aims. COVID-19 has compounded a growing waiting list problem, with over 4.5 million patients now waiting for planned elective care in the UK. Views of patients on waiting lists are rarely considered in prioritization. Our primary aim was to understand how to support patients on waiting lists by hearing their experiences, concerns, and expectations. The secondary aim was to capture objective change in disability and coping mechanisms. Methods. A minimum representative sample of 824 patients was required for quantitative analysis to provide a 3% margin of error. Sampling was stratified by body region (upper/lower limb, spine) and duration on the waiting list. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of elective orthopaedic waiting list patients with their planned intervention paused due to COVID-19. Analyzed parameters included baseline health, change in physical/mental health status, challenges and coping strategies, preferences/concerns regarding treatment, and objective quality of life (EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item scale (GAD-2)). Qualitative analysis was performed via the Normalization Process Theory. Results. A total of 888 patients responded. Better health, pain, and mood scores were reported by upper limb patients. The longest waiters reported better health but poorer mood and anxiety scores. Overall, 82% had tried self-help measures to ease symptoms; 94% wished to proceed with their intervention; and 21% were prepared to tolerate deferral. Qualitative analysis highlighted the overall patient mood to be represented by the terms ‘understandable’, ‘frustrated’, ‘pain’, ‘disappointed’, and ‘not happy/depressed’. COVID-19-mandated health and safety measures and technology solutions were felt to be implemented well. However, patients struggled with access to doctors and pain management, quality of life (physical and psychosocial) deterioration, and delay updates. Conclusion. This is the largest study to hear the views of this ‘hidden’ cohort. Our findings are widely relevant to ensure provision of better ongoing support and communication, mostly within the constraints of current resources. In response, we developed a reproducible local action plan to address highlighted issues. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):583–593

Aims

Paediatric fractures are highly prevalent and are most often treated with plaster. The application and removal of plaster is often an anxiety-inducing experience for children. Decreasing the anxiety level may improve the patients’ satisfaction and the quality of healthcare. Virtual reality (VR) has proven to effectively distract children and reduce their anxiety in other clinical settings, and it seems to have a similar effect during plaster treatment. This study aims to further investigate the effect of VR on the anxiety level of children with fractures who undergo plaster removal or replacement in the plaster room.

Aims. Fracture-related infections (FRIs) are a devastating complication of fracture management. However, the impact of FRIs on mental health remains understudied. The aim of this study was a longitudinal evaluation of patients’ psychological state, and expectations for recovery comparing patients with recurrent FRI to those with primary FRI. Methods. A prospective longitudinal study was conducted at a level 1 trauma centre from January 2020 to December 2022. In total, 56 patients treated for FRI were enrolled. The ICD-10 symptom rating (ISR) and an expectation questionnaire were assessed at five timepoints: preoperatively, one month postoperatively, and at three, six, and 12 months. Results. Recurrent FRI cases consistently exceeded the symptom burden threshold (0.60) in ISR scores at all assessment points. The difference between preoperative-assessed total ISR scores and the 12-month follow-up was not significant in either group, with 0.04 for primary FRI (p = 0.807) and 0.01 for recurrent FRI (p = 0.768). While primary FRI patients showed decreased depression scores post surgery, recurrent FRI cases experienced an increase, reaching a peak at 12 months (1.92 vs 0.94; p < 0.001). Anxiety scores rose for both groups after surgery, notably higher in recurrent FRI cases (1.39 vs 1.02; p < 0.001). Moreover, patients with primary FRI reported lower expectations of returning to normal health at three (1.99 vs 1.11; p < 0.001) and 12 months (2.01 vs 1.33; p = 0.006). Conclusion. The findings demonstrate the significant psychological burden experienced by individuals undergoing treatment for FRI, which is more severe in recurrent FRI. Understanding the psychological dimensions of recurrent FRIs is crucial for comprehensive patient care, and underscores the importance of integrating psychological support into the treatment paradigm for such cases. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):621–627

Aims

Pain is the most frequent complaint associated with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), but the factors contributing to such pain are poorly understood. This study explored diverse demographic, clinical, radiological, psychological, and neurophysiological factors for their potential contribution to pain in patients with ONFH.

Aims

Psychological status may be an important predictor of outcome after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of psychological distress on postoperative health-related quality of life, joint function, self-assessed pain, and sports ability in patients undergoing PAO.

Objectives. This study reports on a secondary exploratory analysis of the early clinical outcomes of a randomised clinical trial comparing robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee with manual UKA performed using traditional surgical jigs. This follows reporting of the primary outcomes of implant accuracy and gait analysis that showed significant advantages in the robotic arm-assisted group. Methods. A total of 139 patients were recruited from a single centre. Patients were randomised to receive either a manual UKA implanted with the aid of traditional surgical jigs, or a UKA implanted with the aid of a tactile guided robotic arm-assisted system. Outcome measures included the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score, Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, Short Form-12, Pain Catastrophising Scale, somatic disease (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Score), Pain visual analogue scale, analgesic use, patient satisfaction, complications relating to surgery, 90-day pain diaries and the requirement for revision surgery. Results. From the first post-operative day through to week 8 post-operatively, the median pain scores for the robotic arm-assisted group were 55.4% lower than those observed in the manual surgery group (p = 0.040). At three months post-operatively, the robotic arm-assisted group had better AKSS (robotic median 164, interquartile range (IQR) 131 to 178, manual median 143, IQR 132 to 166), although no difference was noted with the OKS. At one year post-operatively, the observed differences with the AKSS had narrowed from a median of 21 points to a median of seven points (p = 0.106) (robotic median 171, IQR 153 to 179; manual median 164, IQR 144 to 182). No difference was observed with the OKS, and almost half of each group reached the ceiling limit of the score (OKS > 43). A greater proportion of patients receiving robotic arm-assisted surgery improved their UCLA activity score. Binary logistic regression modelling for dichotomised outcome scores predicted the key factors associated with achieving excellent outcome on the AKSS: a pre-operative activity level > 5 on the UCLA activity score and use of robotic-arm surgery. For the same regression modelling, factors associated with a poor outcome were manual surgery and pre-operative depression. Conclusion. Robotic arm-assisted surgery results in improved early pain scores and early function scores in some patient-reported outcomes measures, but no difference was observed at one year post-operatively. Although improved results favoured the robotic arm-assisted group in active patients (i.e. UCLA ⩾ 5), these do not withstand adjustment for multiple comparisons. Cite this article: M. J. G. Blyth, I. Anthony, P. Rowe, M. S. Banger, A. MacLean, B. Jones. Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Exploratory secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:631–639. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.611.BJR-2017-0060.R1

Objectives. To investigate psychosocial and biomedical outcomes following total hip replacement (THR) and to identify predictors of recovery from THR. Methods. Patients with osteoarthritis (OA) on the waiting list for primary THR in North West England were assessed pre-operatively and at six and 12 months post-operatively to investigate psychosocial and biomedical outcomes. Psychosocial outcomes were anxiety and depression, social support and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Biomedical outcomes were pain, physical function and stiffness. The primary outcome was the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Total Physical Function. Potential predictors of outcome were age, sex, body mass index, previous joint replacement, involvement in the decision for THR, any comorbidities, any complications, type of medication, and pre-operative ENRICHD Social Support Instrument score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression scores and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index score. Results. The study included 206 patients undergoing THR. There were 88 men and 118 women with a mean age of 66.3 years (. sd. 10.4;36 to 89). Pain, stiffness and physical function, severity of OA, HRQoL, anxiety and depression all improved significantly from pre-operative to 12-month assessment (all p < 0.001), with the greatest improvement occurring in the first six months (all p < 0.001). The predictors that were found to influence recovery six months after THR were: pain (p < 0.001), anxiety (p = 0.034), depression (p = 0.001), previous joint replacement (p = 0.006) and anti-inflammatory drugs (p = 0.012). Conclusions. The study identified the key psychosocial and biomedical predictors of recovery following THR. By identifying these predictors, we are able to identify and provide more support for patients at risk of poor recovery following THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:248–54