In the UK, the NHS generates an estimated 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (4% to 5% of the nation’s total carbon emissions) and produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. There is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery and the environmentally sustainable initiatives undertaken to address this. The secondary aim of this study was to describe the barriers to making sustainable changes within orthopaedic surgery. A literature search was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines through EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed libraries using two domains of terms: “orthopaedic surgery” and “environmental sustainability”.Aims
Methods
There is little published on the outcomes after restarting elective orthopaedic procedures following cessation of surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, the reported perioperative mortality in patients who acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection while undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery was 18% to 20%. The aim of this study is to report the surgical outcomes, complications, and risk of developing COVID-19 in 2,316 consecutive patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery in the latter part of 2020 and comparing it to the same, pre-pandemic, period in 2019. A retrospective service evaluation of patients who underwent elective surgical procedures between 16 June 2020 and 12 December 2020 was undertaken. The number and type of cases, demographic details, American society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, BMI, 30-day readmission rates, mortality, and complications at one- and six-week intervals were obtained and compared with patients who underwent surgery during the same six-month period in 2019.Aims
Methods
Elective orthopaedic services have had to adapt to significant system-wide pressures since the emergence of COVID-19 in December 2019. Length of stay is often recognized as a key marker of quality of care in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Expeditious discharge is key in establishing early rehabilitation and in reducing infection risk, both procedure-related and from COVID-19. The primary aim was to determine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic length of stay following hip and knee arthroplasty at a high-volume, elective orthopaedic centre. A retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients undergoing primary or revision hip or knee arthroplasty over a six-month period, from 1 July to 31 December 2020, were compared to the same period in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. Demographic data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, wait to surgery, COVID-19 status, and length of hospital stay were recorded.Aims
Methods
In the late 1980's Michael Freeman conceived the idea that knee replacement would most closely replicate the natural knee joint, if the medial Tibio-Femoral articulation was configured as a “ball-in-socket”. Over the last three decades, medial rotation and medial pivot designs have proved successful in clinical use. Freeman's final iteration of the medial ball-in-socket concept was the Medial Sphere knee. We report the three-year survivorship, clinical outcomes, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and radiographic analysis of this implant in a multi-centre, multi-surgeon, prospective observational study. Patients awaiting total knee replacement were recruited by four centres. They had no medical contraindication to surgery, were able to provide informed consent and were available for follow-up. Primary outcome was implant survival at six months, one, two, three and five years. Secondary outcomes were patient reported outcome measures: Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Euroqol (EQ-5D), International Knee Society Score (IKSS), IKSS Functional score and Health State score, complications and radiographic outcomes. Radiographic analysis was undertaken using the TraumaCad software and data analysis was undertaken using SPSS.Background
Methods
Historically, the clinical performance of novel implants was usually reported by designer surgeons who were the first to acquire clinical data. Regional and national registries now provide rapid access to survival data on new implants and drive ODEP ratings. To assess implant performance, clinical and radiological data is required in addition to implant survival. Prospective, multi-surgeon, multi-centre assessments have been advocated as the most meaningful. We report the preliminary results of such a study for the MiniHip™femoral component and Trinity™ acetabular component (Corin Ltd, UK). As part of a non-designer, multi-surgeon, multi-centre prospective surveillance study to assess the MiniHip™stem and Trinity™ cup, 535 operations on 490 patients were undertaken. At surgery, the average age and BMI of the study group was 58.2 years (range 21 to 76 years) and 27.9 (range 16.3 to 43.4) respectively. Clinical (Harris Hip Score, HHS) and radiological review have been obtained at 6 months, 3 and 5 years. Postal Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and EuroQol- 5D (EQ5D) score have been obtained at 6 months and annually thereafter. To date, 23 study subjects have withdrawn or lost contact, 11 have died, and 9 have undergone revision surgery. By the end of March 2018, 6 month, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 year data had been obtained for 511, 445, 427, 376, 296 and 198 subjects respectively.INTRODUCTION
METHODS
