Research into COVID-19 has been rapid in response to the dynamic global situation, which has resulted in heterogeneity of methodology and the communication of information. Adherence to reporting standards would improve the quality of evidence presented in future studies, and may ensure that findings could be interpreted in the context of the wider literature. The COVID-19 pandemic remains a dynamic situation, requiring continued assessment of the disease incidence and monitoring for the emergence of viral variants and their transmissibility, virulence, and susceptibility to vaccine-induced immunity. More work is needed to assess the long-term impact of COVID-19 infection on patients who sustain a hip fracture. The International Multicentre Project Auditing COVID-19 in Trauma & Orthopaedics (IMPACT) formed the largest multicentre collaborative audit conducted in orthopaedics in order to provide an emergency response to a global pandemic, but this was in the context of many vital established audit services being disrupted at an early stage, and it is crucial that these resources are protected during future health crises. Rapid data-sharing between regions should be developed, with wider adoption of the revised 2022 Fragility Fracture Network Minimum Common Data Set for Hip Fracture Audit, and a pragmatic approach to information governance processes in order to facilitate cooperation and meta-audit. This editorial aims to: 1) identify issues related to COVID-19 that require further research; 2) suggest reporting standards for studies of COVID-19 and other communicable diseases; 3) consider the requirement of new risk scores for hip fracture patients; and 4) present the lessons learned from IMPACT in order to inform future collaborative studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(6):342–345

Reverse Total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) was initially introduced to treat rotator cuff arthropathy. With proven successful long-term outcomes, it has gained a noteworthy surge in popularity with its indications consequently being extended to treating various traumatic glenohumeral diseases. Several countries holding national registries remain a guide to the use the prosthesis, however a notable lack of epidemiological data still exists. More so in South Africa where the spectrum of joint disease related to communicable diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis may influence indications and patient demographics. By analysing the epidemiology of patients who underwent RTSA at our institution, we aimed to outline the local disease spectrum, the patients afflicted and indications for surgery. A retrospective review of all patients operated within the sports unit between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2022 was conducted. An analysis of the epidemiological data pertaining to patient demographics, diagnosis, indications for surgery and complications were recorded. Included in the review were 58 patients who underwent primary RTSA over the 4-year period. There were 41 females and 17 male patients, age <55 years (n= 14) >55 years (n=44). The indications included 23 rotator cuff arthropathy (40%), 12 primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) (20%), 10 avascular necrosis (AVN) humeral head (17%), 7 inflammatory OA (12%), 4 chronic shoulder dislocation (7%) and 2 sequalae of proximal humerus fractures (4%). The study revealed RTSA being performed in patients older than 55 years of age, the main pathologies included rotator cuff arthropathy and primary OA, however AVN and shoulder dislocations secondary to trauma contributed significantly to the total tally of surgeries undertaken. This highlights the disease burden of developing countries contributing to patients presenting for RTSA

Bone grafting is used extensively in orthopaedic reconstructive surgery. Revision hip arthroplasty often presents surgeons with difficult bone loss problems, which can sometimes be addressed using donated bone. This need for bone graft has increased in recent years with greater numbers of joint replacements and increasing life expectancy after replacement, particularly as prostheses are being implanted into younger patients. Current practice of bone banking involves careful donor selection, stringent screening tests and internal safety systems in bone banks to prevent the ever present threat of communicable diseases. Introduction of strict monitoring systems to prevent allograft-related diseases has rendered a significant number of primary hip replacement patients unsuitable for bone donation. This study audited the practice of bone banking at Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust to look into various factors responsible for exclusion of patients from bone banking. All 55 patients underwent screening in pre-operative assessment clinics using standard Proforma to assess their suitability for femoral head donation during the course of their primary hip replacement surgery. After the initial screening stage 33 patients (60%) were excluded due to variety of reasons. The majority of those excluded (23 patients) were not accepted as donors because of their potential risk of transmission of disease to the recipients. The situation is likely to become worse in future as the incidence of communicable diseases is rising in the UK. Alternative sources of bone grafts should be explored in future to meet the demands for, example auto-banking

Acute peri-operative blood loss warranting transfusion is a frequent consequence of major joint replacement (TJR) surgery. Significant peri-operative anemia can contribute to hypotension, dyspnea, coronary ischemia and other peri-operative medical events that can result in increased risk of peri-operative complications, readmissions and impair the patient's ability to mobilise after surgery resulting in a longer length of stay (LOS) and increase skilled nursing facility (SNF) utilization. The risks associated with allogeneic blood transfusions (ABT) administered to treat symptomatic peri-operative anemia are numerous and extend beyond the concerns of transmission of communicable disease (HIV, hepatitis, other). Patients receiving ABTs have been shown to have a longer hospital LOS, higher risk of infection, and higher mortality after TJR than those who do not require transfusion after surgery. As a result, many different pre-operative, peri-operative and post-operative strategies have been utilised to minimise peri-operative blood loss and transfusion need for patients undergoing TJR. Several studies have shown that the strongest predictor of the need for ABT in the TJR patient is the pre-operative hematocrit (Hct). As a result, all patients with unexplained pre-operative anemia should be evaluated for an underlying cause prior to elective TJR surgery. In recent years, focus has shifted towards peri-operative reduction of blood loss with the use of pharmacologic agents like tranexamic acid (TXA). These agents work by inhibiting fibrinolysis and activating plasminogen. Numerous studies have shown that TXA given IV, applied topically into the surgical wound or given orally have been shown to reduce peri-operative bleeding and ABT after both THA and TKR. Regardless of route of administration, all appear to be more efficacious and considerably more cost-effective in reducing the need for ABT than other methods discussed previously. Despite concerns about the potential increased thromboembolic risk in patients undergoing TJR, there does not appear to be any conclusive evidence suggesting an increased risk of venous thromboembolic disease (VTED) in TJR patients who receive peri-operative TXA. Although it may be unnecessary, many TJR surgeons still, however, avoid use of TXA in patients with a past history of VTED, stroke, coronary artery disease (including coronary stents), renal insufficiency, hypercoagulable state and seizure disorder. The use of topical TXA may be safer in some of these high risk patients since systemic absorption is minimal when administered via this route. Although the optimal method of administration (IV, topical, oral or combined) has not yet been determined based on safety, cost and reduction of need for ABT, incorporation of tranexamic acid into a blood conservation program is clearly the standard of care for all TJR programs that should nearly eliminate the need for ABT for patients undergoing TJR