The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) was set up in the UK ‘to provide patients, health professionals and the public with authoritative, robust and reliable guidance on current best practice. In March 2000, NICE provided national guidelines for the selection of prostheses for total hip replacement. Aim: To determine how useful the NICE guidelines for selection of prostheses for primary total hip replacement were to patients who were undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and the health professionals who were looking after them. Method: We surveyed 100 patients, 50 Orthopaedic Surgeons, 40 Orthopaedic nurses and posted a questionnaire to GPs, to which 79 replied (56% response rate). Results: 19% of patients had heard of NICE, but only 2 % were aware of the existence of NICE guidelines on THR and 1% found them useful. Almost all orthopaedic surgeons had heard of NICE and their guidelines for THR, with 74% knowing what the guidelines actually stated but only 14% finding them useful. 78% of surgeons believed that their preferred hip replacement conformed to NICE guidelines, 2% knew that they did not conform and 20% did not know. 27% of general practitioners knew of the guidelines, but only 5% knew what they actually stated and 1% found them useful in their practise. Most nursing staff working in orthopaedic areas had heard of NICE (83%). 43% knew of the NICE guidelines but only 13% knew the actual guidelines and 8% found them useful. Conclusion: NICE has failed to communicate its guidelines to both patients and the public. Few of the health-care professionals found the guidelines of use in their day to day practice. In this instance, NICE has failed to fulfil its mission statement of providing patients and healthcare professionals with reliable guidance on hip replacement prostheses

Aims & Background

Congenital Talipes Equinovarus (CTEV) is the most common congenital musculoskeletal birth defect affecting 1 in 1000 births per annum. We have compared our surgical results to the British Society of Children's Orthopaedics (BSCOS) published guidelines

Background Prescriptive guidelines for selection of implants for hip arthroplasty are likely to become increasingly established, on grounds of safety, cost and effectiveness. Such guidelines were introduced in the UK by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) in 2000. Most departments were non-compliant in one or more respects, and knowledge of the recommendations was limited among clinicians. Concern exists that the recommendations may replace the Bolam Test in cases of clinical negligence in future.

Materials and Methods The recommendations of NICE, from the initial documentation to the present, were scrutinised alongside experience of other nationally-funded or managed healthcare systems in Europe and North America. The evolution of guidance from 1999 onwards, together with the areas of potential difficulty were identified.

Results Potential difficulties were encountered in relation to a number of implants in widespread use in the UK, particularly in relation to the choice of acetabular component (cup), despite the fact that cup loosening accounts for a third of revisions. The use of cup and stem from different manufacturers was also identified as a cause of concern.

Discussion Departments face a choice of adopting the recommendations of NICE in their entirety or continuing with established practice, with the attendant risk of future litigation should certain implants prove to be unacceptable as clinical results become available through the National Registry. Continuation with established practice may be acceptable, even in respect of implants not recommended by NICE, provided data collection activity is maintained. We propose an algorithm through which individual departments may maintain compliance with NICE without altering departmental practice.

Patients who present with a fractured neck of femur (NOF) have a significant rate of morbidity and mortality. In 2011, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published clinical guidelines in order to improve these rates. Within this guideline NICE state that surgery should be performed on all NOF fractures within 36 hours. Within ABMU Health board the 1000 Lives Campaign goes a step further and aims to operate on 90% of patients within 24 hours. This study investigates the effect of an additional NOF theatre list on compliance to these national guidelines. This retrospective study was performed between October-December 2013 and December-February 2015. The first period of data collection represents a daily trauma list whilst the second period allowed an additional NOF theatre list. Data was collected using the National Hip Fracture Database and the Trauma Theatre List. The number of patients meeting the national guidelines increased with the presence of an additional theatre list (75.19% v 60%). This represents a reduction to the average time to theatre of 4 hours and 30 minutes (29:47 v 34:17). The additional theatre list improved prioritisation of patients with NOF fractures on the list (29.46% v 13.33% listed first on list) and reduced the rate of cancellations (19.38 v 29.17%). During this study Morriston Hospital did not meet national guidelines, however an additional theatre list did significantly improve average time to theatre. This study highlights the significant impact a dedicated NOF fracture theatre list can have. Winner – Best Paper Award

There were 70000 people admitted to hospital with fractured hips in 2007 and the incidence is rising by 2% each year. Hip fractures represent significant morbidity and mortality to patients and cost the NHS £1.8 billion annually.

In 2008 the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST) issued a 14-point guideline to be followed for the management of hip fractures. The aim was to improve secondary prevention of osteoporosis, reduce the falls risk and further fractures. This aimed to provide better care to improve the outcomes for patients and reduce the burden of hip fractures on society.

The aim of the audit was to see if the BOAST guidelines are met before and after the transition to a level 1 MTC (Major Trauma Centre) and to measure any impact the change had.

Methods: Prospective data was collected for three months in 2010, 2011 and 2012. 94 case notes were reviewed and compared to the outcomes laid out in the BOAST guidelines to see if standards were met.

Overall adherence to the guideline's recommendations was high throughout the 3 sample months. For each of the 3 sample months 100% adherence was seen in all of the following criteria: further imaging if x-rays unclear, appropriate analgesia, pre-op assessment, seniority of surgeon, orthogeriatrician involvement, seniority of surgeons and submission to the National Hip Fracture Database. The main common area where adherence was less than 100% was with A and E breaches (i.e. greater than 4 hours referral to the ward).

Despite relocation and transition to a level 1 MTC, the management of fractured neck of femur patients compared to the BOAST guidelines remained of a high standard. Further improvements have also been made since moving to the new hospital site where shortcomings in management have been identified.

Improvements from year one to three include prophylactic antibiotics and warfarin reversal; there is now a new trust protocol in place for warfarin reversal in the case of hip fractures. Elsewhere adherence to the guidelines remains high across the sample months. Confirming that despite moving to a level 1 status the trauma team continues to be performing well and managing this group appropriately.

In January 2012 BOAST published a second version of the hip fracture guidelines: A and E breaches were removed from the guidelines. There have also been several new additions to the guidelines, which prompt a further re-audit in the future.

Aims. Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines. Methods. We used the NHFD to identify all operations for fixation of trochanteric fractures in England and Wales between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. A uniform price band from each of three hip fracture implant manufacturers was used to set cost implications alongside variation in implant use. Results. We identified 18,156 A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures in 162 centres. Of these, 13,483 (74.3%) underwent SHS fixation, 2,352 (13.0%) were managed with short IMN, and 2,321 (12.8%) were managed with long IMN. Total cost of IMN added up to £1.89 million in 2021, and the clinical justification for this is unclear since rates of IMN use varied from 0% to 97% in different centres. Conclusion. Most trochanteric hip fractures are managed with SHS, in keeping with national guidelines. There is considerable variance between hospitals for implant choice, despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of more expensive nailing systems. This suggests either a lack of awareness of national guidelines or a choice not to follow them. We encourage provider units to reassess their practice if outwith the national norm. Funding bodies should examine implant use closely in this population to prevent resource waste at a time of considerable health austerity. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):741–745

Introduction. As per national guidelines for Ankle fractures in the United Kingdom, fractures considered stable can be treated with analgesia, splinting and allowed to weight bear as tolerated. The guidelines also suggest further follow-up not mandatory. This study was aimed at evaluating the current clinical practice of managing stable ankle fractures at a university hospital against national guidelines. Method. The study was undertaken using retrospectively collected data, the inclusion criteria being all adults with stable ankle fracture pattern treated non-operatively between December 2022 and April 2023. Collected data included age of patient, date of injury, type of immobilization, number of clinical visits and any complications. Results. 41 cases were identified and analyzed. The mean age of the cohort was 49.8 years (Standard deviation 20.01). Twelve percent (n = 5) were reviewed in clinic, treated and discharged as stable Weber B type fracture pattern as per national guidelines after the first visit. About 52% (n = 21) were seen in clinic twice before discharge, first visit between 1-2 weeks and the last clinic visit between 5-7 weeks. About a third of patients (30%, n = 12) were seen in clinic on more than two occasions. At the first clinic visit 87% (n = 36) were given a boot and allowed to weight bear as tolerated. Two patients were diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism during the treatment duration. Three patients had extended duration of follow up for ongoing symptoms. None discharged after first or second visit needed surgery for displaced or malunited fracture. Conclusion. Patients discharged from clinic after first or second visit did not need any further surgery. As per national guidelines, patients deemed stable weber B lateral malleolus fracture pattern after weight bearing radiograph can be treated safely with a weight bearing walking boot with no further follow up

Abstract. Introduction. Neck of femur (NOF) fracture patients are at risk of developing venous thromboembolisms (VTE). VTE risks could be reduced by adhering to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendation for 1 month of prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin. This audit aimed to assess and improve local compliance to national guidelines on VTE prophylaxis in NOF fracture patients following discharge. Methods. A retrospective consecutive case series of all NOF fractures treated at our institution from May – July 2021 was conducted. Those not eligible for outpatient VTE prophylaxis were excluded (anticoagulated for other indications, completed prophylactic course in hospital, inpatient death, pharmacological prophylaxis contraindicated). The agent and duration of VTE prophylaxis, and the occurrence of clinically significant VTE or bleeds were recorded. A re-audit was conducted in March 2022. Results. From May – July 2021, only 1/65 (1.5%) patient was discharged on a VTE prophylaxis regime consistent with NICE guidelines (1 enoxaparin, 56 rivaroxaban, 6 apixaban; 58 35-day course, 5 28-day course). A quick-guide document summarising the standard inpatient and outpatient VTE prophylaxis regimes for various orthopaedic indications was designed and widely disseminated. In March 2022, 30/34 (88.2%) patients were discharged with enoxaparin and 24/34 (70.6%) received a 28-day course. There were no cases of clinically significant VTE or bleeds in both cycles. Conclusion. Local compliance to national guidelines improved significantly with the implementation of a standardised VTE prophylaxis protocol. Our quick-guide document is a reproducible way of communicating consensus and ensuring consistency within a department

Aim. Dalbavancin is a lipoglycopeptide with a broad antimicrobial spectrum against Gram-positive bacteria and effect against microorganisms in biofilm in vitro. Its pharmacokinetic properties, with an exceptionally long half-life of approximately 300 hours, allow for simplified administration that may be of value in the long-term treatment of bone and joint infections, such as prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Several case reports and case series with “off-lable” treatment with dalbavancin of PJIs exist, but the optimal dosing regimen remains to be defined. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is recommended for treatment with >2 doses of dalbavancin. In the absence of TDM, the Swedish national guidelines for bone and joint infections (2023, . www.infektion.net. ) recommends a loading dose of dalbavancin 1,500 mg on day 1 and 1,500 mg on days 8 – 14, after which from day 28 1,000 mg is given biweekly or 500 mg every week. The aim of the present study was to determine trough levels of dalbavancin in patients with long-term treatment of PJIs according to the national guidelines. Method. Twelve patients with PJI were treated with at least 6 doses of dalbavancin, of which the first two doses were 1500 mg and the following doses were 1000 every second week, and prospectively sampled biweekly for determination of serum concentrations (trough levels) of dalbavancin which was measured by liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The renal function was also examined. Results. The median serum concentration 14 days after the first dose of dalbavancin 1500 mg was 36.3 mg/L (range 6.6 – 62.4 mg/L). The median value 14 days after the second dose of 1500 mg (day 27 – 28) was 48.2 mg/L (range 12.2 – 77.3 mg/L). The trough value after the last dose of a total of 6 – 7 doses was as median 43.1 mg/L (range 26.2 – 97.5 mg/L). Three patients showed a tendency towards successive accumulation of dalbavancin during treatment. None of the patients, including those three with increasing through levels during treatment, showed any significant alteration in creatinine nor glomerular filtration rate. Conclusions. TDM during long-term treatment with dalbavancin is recommended to avoid the risk of accumulation and unnecessarily high trough values. With TDM, the dosing interval can be extended in several cases. In addition, with the support of TDM, subtherapeutic serum concentrations, with the risk of developing resistance, can be avoided

The National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) is a clinically led web based audit used to inform national policy guidelines. The aim of this audit was to establish the accuracy of completion of NHFD v13.0 theatre collection sheets, identify common pitfalls and areas of good practice, whilst raising awareness of the importance of accuracy of this data and the manner in which it reflects performance of CAH Trauma & Orthopaedic unit in relation to national guidelines. Our aim was to improve completion up to >80% by the operating surgeon and improve overall accuracy. The methodology within both cycles of the audit were identical. It involved reviewing the NHFD V13.0 completed by the operating surgeon and cross-checking their accuracy against clinical notes, operation notes, imaging, anaesthetic charts and A&E admission assessment. Following completion of cycle 1 these results were presented, and education surrounding V13.0 was provided, at the monthly trust audit meeting. At this point we introduced a sticker onto the pre-operative checklist for Hip fractures. This included time of admission and reason for delay. We then completed a re-audit. Cycle-1 included 25 operations, 56% (n=14) had a completed V13.0 form. Of these 21% (n=3) were deemed to be 100% accurate. Cycle-2 included 31 operations (between April – June 21) 81% (n=25) had a completed intra-operative from and showed an increase in accuracy to 56% (n=14). Through raising awareness, education and our interventions we have seen a significant improvement in the completion and accuracy of v13.0. Although 100% accuracy was not achieved its clear that education and intervention will improve compliance over time. Through the interventions that we have implemented we have shown that it is possible to improve completion and accuracy of the NHFD V13.0 theatre collection sheet locally and feel this could be implemented nationally

The Australia and New Zealand Sarcoma Association established the Sarcoma Guidelines Working Party to develop national guidelines for the management of Sarcoma. We asked whether surgery at a specialised centre improves outcomes. A systematic review was performed of all available evidence pertaining to paediatric or adult patients treated for bone or soft tissue sarcoma at a specialised centre compared with non-specialised centres. Outcomes assessed included local control, limb salvage rate, 30-day and 90-day surgical mortality, and overall survival. Definitive surgical management at a specialised sarcoma centre improves local control as defined by margin negative surgery, local or locoregional recurrence, and local recurrence free survival. Limb conservation rates are higher at specialised centres, due in part to the depth of surgical experience and immediate availability of multidisciplinary and multimodal therapy. A statistically significant correlation did not exist for 30-day and 90-day mortality between specialised centres and non-specialised centres. The literature is consistent with improved survival when definitive surgical treatment is performed at a specialised sarcoma centre. Evidence-based recommendation: Patients with suspected sarcoma to be referred to a specialised sarcoma centre for surgical management to reduce the risk of local recurrence, surgical complication, and to improve limb conservation and survival. Practice point: Patients with suspected sarcoma should be referred to a specialised sarcoma centre early for management including planned biopsy

Aims. This study sought to estimate the clinical outcomes and describe the nationwide variation in practice, as part of the feasibility workup for a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended randomized clinical trial to determine the optimal treatment of torus fractures of the distal radius in children. Methods. Prospective data collection on torus fractures presenting to our emergency department. Patient consent and study information, including a copy of the Wong-Baker Faces pain score, was issued at the first patient contact. An automated text message service recorded pain scores at days 0, 3, 7, 21, and 42 postinjury. A cross-sectional survey of current accident and emergency practice in the UK was also undertaken to gauge current practice following the publication of NICE guidance. Results. In all, 30 patients with a mean age of 8.9 years were enrolled over a six-week period. Of the 150 potential data points, data was captured in 146, making the data 97.3% complete. Pain scores were recorded at day 0 (mean 6.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.7 to 7.3)), day 3 (4.4 (95% CI 3.5 to 5.2)), day 7 (3.0 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.6)), day 21 (1.2 (95% CI 0.7 to 1.7)) and day 42 (0.4 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.7)). Of the 100 units who participated in the nationwide survey, 38% were unaware of any local or national protocols regarding torus fractures, 41% treated torus fractures with cast immobilization, and over 60% of patients had follow-up arranged, both contradictory to national guidelines. Conclusion. We have demonstrated the severity, recovery trajectory, and variation in pain scores among children with torus fractures. We demonstrate excellent follow-up of patient outcomes using text messages. Despite national guidelines, there is significant variation in practice. This data directly informed the development of an ongoing nationwide randomized clinical trial – the FORearm Fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) study

Periprosthetic joint infection is a serious complication of primary total hip replacement (THR) with significant associated morbidity. In acute infection, Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) may be considered. Current national guidelines recommend a DAIR should be performed by “an experienced arthroplasty surgeon┕ but do not specify the need for this to be a revision arthroplasty surgeon. We investigated outcomes in our NHS Trust of DAIR procedures performed by revision and non-revision arthroplasty surgeons. Infection registry data and patient records were analysed for all DAIR procedures of infected primary THRs between 2017 and 2021. Data collected included details of the primary surgery, the presentation with infection, the DAIR procedure and any subsequent complications including return to theatre at any time point. Routinely collected pre- and post-operative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were reviewed. 54 periprosthetic joint infections of primary THRs received a DAIR procedure. 41 DAIRs were performed by a revision surgeon and 13 by non-revision surgeons. There was no significant difference in time from primary THR to presentation with infection, time from presentation to DAIR or pre-operative C-reactive protein between the two groups. In 21 (38.9%) patients the DAIR procedure was classed as a treatment failure; 17 patients (31.5%) returned to theatre for further revision surgery, one (2.4%) died related to infection and three (5.6%) had persistent infection but did not receive further surgery. Treatment failure was significantly higher in the non-revision surgeon group (9/13 (69.2%)) than in the revision surgeon group (12/41 (29.3%)) (p = 0.02). Overall, improvement in PROMs after DAIR was seen at both six and 12 months. The overall success rate of DAIR was 61.1% and there was a sustained improvement in PROMs after surgery. However, there was a significant difference in failure rates between revision surgeons and non-revision surgeons

Introduction. Management of complex fractures poses a significant challenge. Evolving research and changes to national guidelines suggest better outcomes are achieved by transfer to specialist centres. The development of Major Trauma Networks was accompanied by relevant financial arrangements. These do not apply to patients with closed fractures referred for specialist treatment by similar pathways. Despite a surge in cases transferred for care, there is little information available regarding the financial impact on receiving institutions. Materials & Methods. This retrospective study examines data from a Level 1 trauma centre. Patients were identified from our electronic referral system, used for all referrals. Transferred adult patients, undergoing definitive treatment of acute isolated closed tibial fractures, were included for a 2-year period. Data was collected using our clinical and Patient Level Information and Costing (PLICS) systems including coding, demographics, treatment, length of stay (LOS), total operative time, number of operations, direct healthcare costs, and NHS reimbursements. Results. 104 patients were identified, 23 patients were treated by internal fixation and 81 with circular frames. Patients required a median of 190 minutes of total operative time and 6 days of hospital stay at a median cost of £16,233 each, median reimbursement was £10,625. The total cost of treatment for all 104 patients was £2,205,611 and total reimbursement was £1,391463, the median deficit per patient being £5825. The overall deficit over the 2 years was £814,148. Conclusions. This study reveals a considerable economic burden associated with treating complex tibial fractures. It should be emphasised that these do not include patients referred for fracture-related infection or non-union, who may also incur similar deficits in recovered costs. These findings emphasise the importance of understanding and addressing the financial implications of managing tertiary referral orthopaedic trauma patients to ensure efficient and sustainable resource allocation

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are very common injuries. National recommendations (British Orthopaedic Association, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)) exist in the UK to guide the management of these injuries. These guidelines provide recommendations about several aspects of care including which type of injuries to treat non-operatively and surgically, timing of surgery and routine follow-up. In particular, current recommendations include considering immobilizing patients for 4 weeks in plaster for those managed conservatively, and operating on fractures within 72 hours for intra-articular injuries and 7 days for extra-articular fractures. With increased demands for services and an ageing population, prompt surgery for those presenting with distal radius fractures is not always possible. A key factor is the need for prompt surgery for hip fracture patients. This study is an audit of the current standard of care at a busy level 2 trauma unit against national guidelines for the management of DRFs. This retrospective audit includes all patients presenting to our emergency department from June to September 2018. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of a closed distal radius fracture and follow-up in our department were included in the study. Those with open fractures were excluded. Data was retrieved from clinical coding, electronic patient records, and IMPAX Client (Picture archiving and communication system). The following data was collected on patients treated conservatively and those managed surgically:- (1)Time to surgery for surgical management; (2)Period of immobilization for both conservative and operative groups. 45 patients (13 male, 32 female) with 49 distal radius fractures (2 patients had bilateral injuries) were included. Patients had mean age 63 years (range 19 to 92 years) 30 wrists were treated non-operatively and 19 wrists treated surgically (8 K-wires, 10 ORIF, 1 MUA). Mean time to surgery in the operative group was 8 days (range 1 – 21 days, median 7 days). Mean time to surgery for intra-articular fractures was 7 days (range 1 – 21) and 12 days for extra-articular fractures (range 4 – 20). Mean immobilization period in those treated in plaster is 6 weeks (range 4 – 13 weeks, median 5.6 weeks). At busy level 2 trauma units with limited theatre capacity and a high volume of hip fracture admissions, time to surgery for less urgent injuries such as wrist fractures is often delayed. National guidelines are useful in helping to guide management however their standards are often difficult to achieve in the context of increasing populations in urban areas and an ageing population

It is known that Osteoporosis is the pathology of bone mass and tissue loss resulting in an increase of fragility, risk of fracture occurrence, and risk of fracture recurrence. We noted there was no definitive pathway in our last audit, therefore recommended: availability of the Osteoporosis clinic referral form in an accessible place, the form be filled by the doctor reviewing the patient in the first fracture clinic, and a liaison nurse to ensure these forms were filled and sent to the Osteoporosis clinic. This second audit analyses our Trust's response to these recommendations and effect achieved in Osteoporosis care. We reviewed our local data base from the 7/27/2020 – 10/2/2021 retrospectively for distal radius fractures who were seen in fracture clinic. We analysed a sample size of 59 patients, excluding patients who had already commenced bone protection medications. 67.7% of our patients had neither been on bone protection medications nor recorded referrals and 13.5% were already on bone protection medications when they sustained the fragility fracture. Ten out of the 51 patients were offered referral to the osteoporosis clinic, and one refused. This makes 20% (10 out of 50) of the patients had completed referrals. In comparison, in our first audit, 11% had already been on bone protection medications and 18% had completed referrals. The second cycle showed a slight increase in compliance. Majority of the referrals were completed by Orthopaedic Consultants in both audits and ana awareness increase noted among non-consultants in starting the referral process. Based on our analysis, our Trust has a slight improvement in commencing bone protection medications, associated with slight improvement in completing referrals to the Osteoporosis clinic. Despite our recommendations in the first audit, there is still no easily accessible definitive pathway to ensure our Trust's patients have timely access to bone protection and continued care at the Osteoporosis clinic. We recommend streamlining our recommendations to have a more effective approach in ensuring our Trust meets national guidelines. We will implement a Yes or No question assessment for patients visiting clinic in our electronic database which should assist in referral completions

Introduction. A greater emphasis has been placed on fracture related infection (FRI) orthopaedic practice as a separate entity in recent years. Since the publication of the FRI consensus definition and guidelines, there has been an increase in the published literature on the topic and a move towards considering FRI as separate from general orthopaedic practice and as work that requires a more specialist approach. The aim of this study was to audit current FRI practice in the UK. Materials & Methods. Orthopaedic practice related to FRI in the UK was audited using a semi-structured questionnaire. Respondents were from a range of institutions, specialties and clinical roles to reflect the multi-disciplinary nature of treating FRI. The online tool SurveyMonkey was used to share the survey at the 2022 annual meeting of the British Limb Reconstruction Society. Twenty-one questions were asked in the following domains: scope of practice, theatre and clinic capacity, availability of the multidisciplinary team, renumeration for work and scope of FRI networks. Results. Of the 36 respondents, the majority (64%) worked in a major trauma centre. In the majority of cases, bone infection was managed by the limb reconstruction team (68%) although in most centres the wider team was often also involved including the general on call, the trauma team and the arthroplasty team. When referrals were made elsewhere, this was usually done to known individuals rather than established FRI networks. 80% of respondents said that there was a bone infection MDT in their unit and this usually met weekly. This usually included orthopaedics and microbiology but plastics in only 43% of cases and radiology in only 23% of cases. Most respondents said that the lack of funding and appropriate tariffs were the main barrier to FRI management locally (62%) and nationally (83%). Most respondents (83%) said that bone infection practice should be centralised. The overwhelming majority of this cohort (90%) said that patient outcomes would be improved by cases being managed in dedicated centres. Conclusions. There is variation in practice for the management of bone infection in the UK. This reflects the lack of clear national guidelines and the lack of established networks for management and onward referral. There is agreement that patient outcomes would be improved by more formal networks and specialised centres but also recognition that remuneration is a significant barrier to implementing change. This survey reflects practice in units with an interest in limb reconstruction and bone infection. Further work is needed to evaluate practice across district general hospitals in the UK and to build consensus around best practice and national strategies for improved care

Background. Advice and education are considered vital components of back pain care within national guidelines. However, a recent systematic review only found low grade evidence for a small average effect. They also reported wide heterogeneity in intervention design and delivery. This review aimed to understand why intervention design varied and what limited effectiveness by examining the underlying theoretical foundations of the studies from that review. Method. Population, context, selection criteria, intervention(s), control, outcome measures, how the intervention was hypothesised to produce outcomes and author recommendations based on results of the study were extracted from text records. The extent to which the advice included matched a published international consensus statement on evidence-based advice for back pain was recorded. Whether interventions or settings were complex was determined using the Medical Research Council complex intervention development and evaluation guidance and the extent to which they met complexity reporting criteria was recorded. Results. The review included 26 trials conducted over 25 years. Differences In causal pathways could explain diversity in intervention design but these were not clearly described or evaluated. All studies were complex in terms of intervention and setting. This was rarely considered in intervention and trial design or when discussing the results. Although interventions were frequently described in detail only a few explained the process and justification of the design. Theories of education or behaviour change were rarely applied. Conclusion. These studies have not deepened our understanding of how education improves outcomes. Future RCTs should engage more with theory and other theory-based research methods should to be considered. Conflict of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding

Osteoporosis is a disease when bone mass and tissue is lost, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and increase susceptibility to develop fracture. The osteoporosis prevalence increases markedly with age, from 2% at 50 years to more than 25% at 80 years. 1. in women. The vast majority of distal radius fractures (DRFs) can be considered fragility fractures. The DRF is usually the first medical presentation of these fractures. With an aging population, all fracture clinics should have embedded screening for bone health and falls risk. DRF is the commonest type of fracture in perimenopausal women and is associated with an increased risk of later non-wrist fracture of up to one in five in the subsequent decade. 2. . According to the national guidelines in managing the fragility fractures of distal radius with regards the bone health review, we, as orthopedic surgeons, are responsible to detect the risky patients, refer them to the responsible team to perform the required investigations and offer the treatment. We reviewed our local database (E-trauma) all cases of fracture distal radius retrospectively during the period from 01/08/2019 to 29/09/2019. We included total of 45 patients who have been managed conservatively and followed up in fracture clinic. Our inclusion criteria was: women aged 65 years and over, men aged 75 years and over with risk factors, patients who are more than 50 years old and sustained low energy trauma whatever the sex is or any patient who has major risk factor (current or frequent recent use of oral or systemic glucocorticoids, untreated premature menopause or previous fragility fracture). We found that 96% of patients were 50 years old or more and 84% of the patients were females. 71% of patients were not referred to Osteoporosis clinic and 11% were already under the orthogeriatric care and 18% only were referred. Out of the 8 referred patients, 3 were referred on 1st appointment, 1 on the 3rd appointment, 1 on discharge from fracture clinic to GP again and 3 were without clear documentation of the time of referral. We concluded that we as trust are not compliant to the national guidelines with regards the osteoporosis review for the DRF as one of the first common presentations of fragility fractures. We also found that the reason for that is that there is no definitive clear pathway for the referral in our local guidelines. We recommended that the Osteoporosis clinic referral form needs to be available in the fracture clinic in an accessible place and needs to be filled by the doctor reviewing the patient in the fracture clinic in the 1st appointment. A liaison nurse also needs to ensure these forms have been filled and sent to the orthogeriatric team. Alternatively, we added a portal on our online database (e-trauma), therefore the patient who fulfils the criteria for bone health review should be referred to the orthogeriatric team to review

Abstract. Introduction. The paediatric population present unique challenges to the knee surgeon, particularly when treating recurrent patellofemoral instability(PFI), the management of which is poorly standardised. Through the EPPIC BASK National Trainee Collaborative, we aimed to identify which procedures (and in which combination) are being used to surgically manage recurrent PFI in skeletally immature patients across the UK. Methods. A retrospective national service evaluation via a trainee collaborative analysing local trust data between 1st January 2014 and 31st December 2019. Data from institutions registered for EPPIC was compiled and compared to the national guidelines for adults. Results. A total of 333 patients were classified as skeletally immature(radiologically open physes) across 28 hospitals. Mean age was 14.1 years(+/- 4.5) with 64.9% being female. Mean number of procedures performed was 11.9 (+/-16.4). Isolated medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) was the most common procedure, performed in 65.8% of patients. Combined MPFLR and TTO was undertaken in 13.2% of patients. Proximal realignment surgery was performed in 5.1% of patients. Lateral releases were performed in 18.3% of patients with 8.4% performed in isolation. Conclusion. This study highlights the national variation in surgical treatment of PFI in skeletally immature patients. The guidance for adults cannot be applied universally to the skeletally immature, and it not always acceptable to delay treatment until physes close. This lack of standardisation within the UK in the management of recurrent PFI in skeletally immature patients highlights the need for a national consensus in appropriate surgical management of this patient population