Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the provision of orthopaedic care across the UK. During the pandemic orthopaedic specialist registrars were redeployed to “frontline” specialties occupying non-surgical roles. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic training in the UK is unknown. This paper sought to examine the role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on postgraduate orthopaedic education. Methods. A 42-point questionnaire was designed, validated, and disseminated via e-mail and an instant-messaging platform. Results. A total of 101 orthopaedic trainees, representing the four nations (Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland), completed the questionnaire. Overall, 23.1% (23/101) of trainees were redeployed to non-surgical roles. Of these, 73% (17/23) were redeployed to intensive treatment units (ITUs), 13% (3/23) to A/E, and 13%(3/23%) to general medicine. Of the trainees redeployed to ITU 100%, (17/17) received formal induction. Non-deployed or returning trainees had a significant reduction in sessions. In total, 42.9% (42/101) % of trainees were not timetabled into fracture clinic, 53% (53/101) of trainees had one allocated theatre list per week, and 63.8%(64/101) of trainees did not feel they obtained enough experience in the attached subspecialty and preferred repeating this. Overall, 93% (93/101) of respondents attended at least one weekly online webinar, with 79% (79/101) of trainees rating these as useful or very useful, while 95% (95/101) trainees attended online deanery teaching which was rated as more useful than online webinars (p = 0.005). Conclusion. Orthopaedic specialist trainees occupied an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has had a significant impact on orthopaedic training. It is imperative this is properly understood to ensure orthopaedic specialist trainees achieve competencies set out in the training curriculum. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:676–682

The imminent introduction of the new Trauma & Orthopaedic (T&O) curriculum, and the implementation of the Improving Surgical Training initiative, reflect yet another paradigm shift in the recent history of trauma and orthopaedic training. The move to outcome-based training without time constraints is a radical departure from the traditional time-based structure and represents an exciting new training frontier. This paper summarizes the history of T&O training reform, explains the rationale for change, and reflects on lessons learnt from the past.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2-3:181–190.

Background. Hitherto, no study has compared blood loss (BL) after different thromoprophylactic regimes (TR). The objective of this study was to quantify and compare BL in total hip arthroplasty (THA) under three different TRs. Methods. Between September 2013 and July 2014, sixty primary, unilateral, same-implant THAs entered a randomised, double-blind clinical trial. The patients were randomised to receive manufacturers' recommended doses of enoxaparin, dabigatran or rivaroxaban. Complete blood counts were obtained preoperatively and on the third day postoperatively. BL was calculated according to the Nadler formula. We also evaluated the occurence of wound healing disturbances (WHDs). All data were analysed using R statistical software. Results. The mean BL and standard deviations were 844 ± 222 ml for enoxaparin, 854 ± 205 ml for dabigatran and 806 ± 227 ml for rivaroxaban. The BL did not significantly differ between groups (Kruskall-Wallis, p=0.92). More WHDs occured in the rivaroxaban group (5/20), compared to enoxaparin (2/20) and dabigatran (3/20). Conclusions. None of the chemical TR is superior to others in terms of reducing the BL. There seems to be more WHDs with the use of oral agents - this finding needs further studies. Level of evidence. 1b (Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, Oxford). Approval. This study was approved by The Medical Centre of Postgraduate Education Ethical Committee. Disclosure. The authors disclose no competing interests

Background: General practitioners (GPs), orthopaedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, rheumatologists and pain consultants manage the majority of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) in the Republic of Ireland. However, little is known about their attitudes and beliefs and the factors that influenced them. This study aimed to investigate factors that influenced doctors’ attitudes and beliefs to CLBP. Method: A cross-sectional questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of GPs (n=750; 35%), and all orthopaedic surgeons (n=81), neurosurgeons (n=9), rheumatologists (n=26), and pain consultants (n=24) in the republic of Ireland. The questionnaire pack contained a demographic data form, two clinical vignettes, and an attitudes measure, the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (PABS.PT). Approval was obtained from the UCD Human Research Ethics Committee. Results: The response rate was 58% (n=523). Doctors were qualified 23.4±9.4 years. Analysis of the vignettes showed there was no significant difference (p> 0.05) between those who had undertaken postgraduate education (PGE) regarding referral rates to physiotherapy, investigations, or secondary care. Prescription rates were significantly lower for those who had undertaken PGE (88% v 94%, χ. 2. =4.95, p< 0.05), as was their biomedical score on the PABS.PT (41.3 v 43.1, df=507, p=0.03). The number of years since qualification was dichotomised (1–23 yrs, > 23 yrs), and there was no significant difference in the management of the vignettes, except referral rates for investigations which was greater for doctors qualified > 23 years (3% v 52%, χ. 2. =10.71, p=0.001). Conclusion: Demographic factors (PGE and the number of years since qualification) did not significantly influence doctors’ practice behaviour

British military forces remain heavily committed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. A recent workload analysis from Op HERRICK identified a high surgical workload, particularly orthopaedic, under the care of a sole consultant orthopaedic surgeon. There are no orthopaedic training posts in UK that consistently provide training in ballistic trauma. In order to prepare Military orthopaedic trainees for future deployment, a new orthopaedic registrar post, on Op HERRICK, was created. Prospective analysis of trainee and trainer operative logbooks, between Jan 27th and March 24th 2008, was performed. Records were kept of orthopaedic and postgraduate teaching schedules, audit and research projects and all OCAP training assessments. One hundred and fifty-seven cases and 272 procedures were performed during the study period. Sixty-two per cent of cases were orthopaedic. Fourteen major amputations were performed and 7 external fixators applied. Five fasciotomies, 9 skeletal traction pins were inserted and 7 skin grafting procedures were performed. Limb debridement was the most common procedure (n=59). Eleven per cent of cases were children and 50 per cent of cases were emergencies. Thirty-eight per cent of cases were performed out of hours (18.00–08.00 hrs). Mean operating hours per week was 35 hrs. Four Procedure Based Assessments were performed and 16 hours of postgraduate education was conducted during the deployment. Two major audits were initiated and five publications were prepared, one has already been accepted for publication. Trainee exposure to high-energy transfer trauma is high when compared to that seen in the NHS. The numbers of certain index procedures, such as external fixation, is similar to those achieved by an average orthopaedic trainee in six years of higher surgical training. The opportunity for one-on-one training exceeds that available in the NHS and learning and academic opportunities are maximised due to the close working environment

Quality assurance for training in trauma and orthopaedics was provided by the JCHST through the SAC for Trauma and Orthopaedics. To date there have been written SAC standards; some are compulsory and others advisory and will generate requirements or recommendations to change if unmet on inspection. There has been a major change in the way postgraduate training is monitored and quality assured, with the formation of the PMETB, which now has the combined responsibility for all postgraduate training. The aims and objectives of our study were to measure the effectiveness of the current quality assurance system for training in Trauma and Orthopaedics, and to determine the reduction in the number of unmet compulsory standards at the end of the visits process and how effectively these requirements were implemented. We also identified the deficiencies in each component of training and determined the current general profile of the quality of training in Trauma and Orthopaedics. The inspection visits, progress and revisit reports were collected from training regions that were visited after the standards were implemented. In 109 units, in the 3 years studied, the inspection process reduced the overall unmet standards from a mean of 14.8% (10.3-19.2%) to 8.9% (6.5%-12.7%). The number of unmet requirement per unit fell from 4.6 to 2.8 (p<0.05). 27% of units did not improve. Overall 15% of standards were deficient, least in Scottish units and most in Irish units. Currently registrars do 1.4 trauma lists, 2.8 elective lists, 1.3 fracture clinics and 2.1 elective clinics per week. This is the first multi-regional study of a national accreditation process. Quality assurance requires standards setting and rectification. These findings are important for the imminent restructuring by the Postgraduate Medical Education Board

Introduction: In August 2007, the Department of Health initiative Modernising Medical Careers was implemented. This was a system of reform and development in postgraduate medical education and training. In preparation for the changes, the SAC for T& O outlined a new curriculum. The emphasis of early training, StR years 1 and 2, was to be trauma. We aim to identify how effectively the SAC proposals are being applied, and what difference this makes to the trainees’ operative experience? Furthermore, how do the new posts compare to the historic SHO models?. Methods: A survey carried out by BOTA allowed us to assess post compliance with the SAC recommendations. A compliant job was defined as trauma based for 50% or more of working time. Consent was obtained to evaluate the eLogbooks of trainees in compliant and non-compliant jobs, along with registrars who had previously held traditional SHO grade posts. Overall operative experience over a specified 4 month time period was examined, with focus on routine trauma procedures. Results: The results of the BOTA and SAC survey revealed that 45% of the new orthopaedic posts were compliant with curriculum guidelines. The eLogbooks of 92 individuals were analysed; 28 historical posts, 34 compliant and 30 non-compliant. The mean total number of recorded entries by trainees in the 4 month period was 73.2 in the historic group, 90.5 in the compliant and 87.3 in the non-compliant job group. The corresponding numbers of trauma operations were 35.7, 48.4 and 41.5. Conclusions: Operative experience has improved since the introduction of the new curriculum. The new posts are offering more operative and in particular trauma exposure than traditional SHO jobs. If jobs can be restructured such that they all comply with the SAC, educational opportunities in the early years will be maximised