Aims. The aim of this study was to produce clinical consensus recommendations about the non-surgical treatment of children with Perthes’ disease. The recommendations are intended to support clinical practice in a condition for which there is no robust evidence to guide optimal care. Methods. A two-round, modified Delphi study was conducted online. An advisory group of children’s orthopaedic specialists consisting of physiotherapists, surgeons, and clinical nurse specialists designed a survey. In the first round, participants also had the opportunity to suggest new statements. The survey included statements related to ‘Exercises’, ‘Physical activity’, ‘Education/information sharing’, ‘Input from other services’, and ‘Monitoring assessments’. The survey was shared with clinicians who regularly treat children with Perthes’ disease in the UK using clinically relevant specialist groups and social media. A predetermined threshold of ≥ 75% for consensus was used for recommendation, with a threshold of between 70% and 75% being considered as ‘points to consider’. Results. A total of 40 participants took part in the first round, of whom 31 completed the second round. A total of 87 statements were generated by the advisory group and included in the first round, at the end of which 31 achieved consensus and were removed from the survey, and an additional four statements were generated. A total of 60 statements were included in the second round and 45 achieved the threshold for consensus from both rounds, with three achieving the threshold for ‘points to consider’. The recommendations predominantly included self-management, particularly relating to advice about exercise and education for children with Perthes’ disease and their families. Conclusion. Children’s orthopaedic specialists have reached consensus on recommendations for non-surgical treatment in Perthes’ disease. These statements will support decisions made in clinical practice and act as a foundation to support clinicians in the absence of robust evidence. The dissemination of these findings and the best way of delivering this care needs careful consideration, which we will continue to explore. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5):501–507

Aims. To review the evidence and reach consensus on recommendations for follow-up after total hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods. A programme of work was conducted, including: a systematic review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness literature; analysis of routine national datasets to identify pre-, peri-, and postoperative predictors of mid-to-late term revision; prospective data analyses from 560 patients to understand how patients present for revision surgery; qualitative interviews with NHS managers and orthopaedic surgeons; and health economic modelling. Finally, a consensus meeting considered all the work and agreed the final recommendations and research areas. Results. The UK poSt Arthroplasty Follow-up rEcommendations (UK SAFE) recommendations apply to post-primary hip and knee arthroplasty follow-up. The ten-year time point is based on a lack of robust evidence beyond ten years. The term 'complex cases' refers to individual patient and surgical factors that may increase the risk for arthroplasty failure. For Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) 10A* minimum implants, it is safe to disinvest in routine follow-up from one to ten years post-non-complex hip and knee arthroplasty provided there is rapid access to orthopaedic review. For ODEP 10A* minimum implants in complex cases, or non-ODEP 10A* minimum implants, periodic follow-up post-hip and knee arthroplasty may be required from one to ten years. At ten years post-hip and knee arthroplasty, clinical and radiological evaluation is recommended. After ten years post-hip and knee arthroplasty, frequency of further follow-up should be based on the ten-year assessment; ongoing rapid access to orthopaedic review is still required. Conclusion. Complex cases, implants not meeting the ODEP 10A* criteria, and follow-up after revision surgery are not covered by this recommendation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):72–78

Aims. The adequate provision of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers has come under considerable scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate staff awareness of PPE guidance, perceptions of PPE measures, and concerns regarding PPE use while caring for COVID-19 patients. In addition, responses of doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals (OHCPs) were compared. Methods. The inclusion criteria were all staff working in clinical areas of the hospital. Staff were invited to take part using a link to an online questionnaire advertised by email, posters displayed in clinical areas, and social media. Questions grouped into the three key themes - staff awareness, perceptions, and concerns - were answered using a five-point Likert scale. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare results across all three groups of staff. Results. Overall, 315 staff took part in our study. There was a high awareness of PPE guidance at 84.4%, but only 52.4% of staff reported adequate PPE provision. 67.9% were still keen to come to work, despite very high levels of anxiety relating to contracting COVID-19 despite wearing PPE. Doctors had significantly higher ratings for questions relating to PPE awareness compared to other staff groups, while nursing staff and OHCPs had significantly higher levels of anxiety compared to doctors in relation to PPE and contracting COVID-19 (p < 0.05 using a Kruskal-Wallis test). Conclusion. We believe four recommendations are key to improve PPE measures and decrease anxiety: 1) nominated ward/department PPE champions; 2) anonymized reporting for PPE concerns; 3) formal PPE education sessions; and 4) drop-in counselling sessions for staff. We hope the insight and recommendations from this study can improve the PPE situation and maintain the health and wellbeing of the clinical work force, in order to care for COVID-19 patients safely and effectively

Introduction. Lack of standardization of outcome measurement has hampered an evidence-based approach to clinical practice and research. We report on the progress on establishing a minimal set of core domains for outcome measurement in distal radius fracture. Materials and methods. Participants included an expert panel of orthopaedic surgeons, outcome researchers, patients, physiotherapists, industry representatives involved in distal radius research and partners in regulatory affairs. Decisions were made by review of evidence and theory and establishing group consensus. Results. There was consensus that clinical research studies should include a proof of concept outcome that would directly assess the presumed direct benefit of the intervention. We identified a need for additional outcome measures for research including measures that provide more detail on pain and function; or that address supplemental concepts important to that study. Measures of fracture healing/alignment, grip strength, joint motion were recognized as commonly utilized secondary outcomes. Discussion and Conclusion. Our approach provides preliminary steps in establishing core domains that have content relevant to patient goals (i.e. pain and function) and the providers’ treatment goals (i.e. strength, range of motion, function). The panel recommendations provide flexibility in establishing customized data collection for specific indications; but offer some core consistency

Introduction. To develop an international guideline (AOGO) about use of osteobiologics in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) for treating degenerative spine conditions. Method. The guideline development process was guided by AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative (KF Degen) and followed the Guideline International Network McMaster Guideline Development Checklist. The process involved 73 participants with expertise in degenerative spine diseases and surgery from 22 countries. Fifteen systematic reviews were conducted addressing respective key topics and evidence were collected. The methodologist compiled the evidence into GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks. Guideline panel members judged the outcomes and other criteria and made the final recommendations through consensus. Result. Five conditional recommendations were created. A conditional recommendation is about the use of allograft, autograft or a cage with an osteobiologic in primary ACDF surgery. Other conditional recommendations are about use of osteobiologic for single or multi-level ACDF, and for hybrid construct surgery. It is suggested that surgeons use other osteobiologics rather than human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in common clinical situations. Surgeons are recommended to choose one graft over another or one osteobiologic over another primarily based on clinical situation, and the costs and availability of the materials. Conclusion. This AOGO guideline is the first to provide recommendations for the use of osteobiologics in ACDF. Despite the comprehensive searches for evidence, there were few studies completed with small sample sizes and primarily as case series with inherent risks of bias. Therefore high quality clinical evidence is demanded to improve the guideline

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) recommends performing daily troponin testing on postoperative days 0 through 3 for noncardiac surgical patients to decrease the mortality rate due to myocardial injury. Indications for testing include:. ->65 yo. -45-64 yo with significant cardiovascular disease. -a Revised Cardiac Risk Index score (RCRI) > 1. Troponin elevation > 30 ng/L is termed “myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery” (MINS). The study objective was to determine the prognostic relevance of applying CCS recommendations. 669 patients undergoing THA were included in the study. Based on the CCS recommendation there were 4 patient Groups depending on whether or not they met the MINS screening protocol criteria and whether or not it was applied:. -A - met & applied (n=181). -B - met & not applied (n=248). -C – not met & applied (n=10). -D – not met & not applied (n=230). 307 (45.8%) males and 363 (54.2%) females with an average age of 67.8 years were included. Group A- 24% incidence (43 patients) of troponin rise & 5% incidence (9 patients) of cardiac complications. Group B- 0.4% incidence (1 patient) of cardiac complications. Groups A + B – representing all patients who should have had the MINS screening protocol applied according to the CCS recommendations − 10 (2.3%) patients developed cardiac complication and one (0.2%) patient death. MINS screening protocol group (A & C) LOS was 4.0 days compared to 1.4 days for those not screened (p-value: <0.001). Applying the CCS MINS screening protocol to elective THA patients added no benefit in predicting/preventing postoperative cardiac events but was associated with a significant increase in LOS. Following current CCS recommendations without more specifications and clinical evidence is unwarranted

Aims. Aseptic loosening is the most common cause of failure following cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and has been linked to poor cementation technique. We aimed to develop a consensus on the optimal technique for component cementation in TKA. Methods. A UK-based, three-round, online modified Delphi Expert Consensus Study was completed focusing on cementation technique in TKA. Experts were identified as having a minimum of five years’ consultant experience in the NHS and fulfilling any one of the following criteria: a ‘high volume’ knee arthroplasty practice (> 150 TKAs per annum) as identified from the National joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man; a senior author of at least five peer reviewed articles related to TKA in the previous five years; a surgeon who is named trainer for a post-certificate of comletion of training fellowship in TKA. Results. In total, 81 experts (round 1) and 80 experts (round 2 and 3) completed the Delphi Study. Four domains with a total of 24 statements were identified. 100% consensus was reached within the cement preparation, pressurization, and cement curing domains. 90% consensus was reached within the cement application domain. Consensus was not reached with only one statement regarding the handling of cement during initial application to the tibial and/or femoral bone surfaces. Conclusion. The Cementing Techniques In Knee Surgery (CeTIKS) Delphi consensus study presents comprehensive recommendations on the optimal technique for component cementing in TKA. Expert opinion has a place in the hierarchy of evidence and, until better evidence is available these recommendations should be considered when cementing a TKA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):682–688

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the information topics that should be addressed according to the parents of children with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in the diagnostic and treatment phase during the first year of life. Second, we explored parental recommendations to further optimize the information provision in DDH care. Methods. A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews was conducted between September and December 2020. A purposive sample of parents of children aged younger than one year, who were treated for DDH with a Pavlik harness, were interviewed until data saturation was achieved. A total of 20 interviews with 22 parents were conducted. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, independently reviewed, and coded into categories and themes. Results. Interviews revealed four fundamental information topics that should be addressed in the different phases of the DDH healthcare trajectory: general information (screening phase), patient-specific information (diagnostic and treatment phase), practical information (treatment phase), and future perspectives (treatment and follow-up phase). To further optimize the information provision in DDH care, parents wished for more accessible and trustworthy general information prior to the first hospital visit to be better prepared for the diagnosis. Furthermore, parents wanted more personalized and visually supported information for a better understanding of the nature of the disease and the reason for treatment. Conclusion. This study offers novel insights to optimize the information provision in DDH care. The main finding is the shift in information need from general information in the screening phase to patient-specific information in the diagnostic and treatment phase of DDH. Parents prefer visually-supported information, provided in a timely fashion, and tailored to their child’s situation. These recommendations potentially decrease parental anxiety, insecurity, confusion, and increase parental empowerment and treatment adherence throughout the diagnostic and treatment phase of DDH. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(7):496–506

We performed this systematic overview on the overlapping meta-analyses that analyzed autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as an adjuvant in the repair of rotator cuff tears and identify the studies which provide the current best evidence on this subject and generate recommendations for the same. We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects on September 8, 2021, to identify meta-analyses that analyzed the efficacy of PRP as an adjuvant in the repair of rotator cuff tears. Methodological quality assessment was made using Oxford Levels of Evidence, AMSTAR scoring, and AMSTAR 2 grades and used the Jadad decision algorithm to generate recommendations. 20 meta-analyses fulfilling the eligibility criteria were included. The AMSTAR scores of the included studies varied from 6–10 (mean:7.9). All the included studies had critically low reliability in their summary of results due to their methodological flaws according to AMSTAR 2 grades. The initial size of the tear and type of repair performed do not seem to affect the benefit of PRPs. Among the different preparations used, leucocyte poor (LP)-PRP possibly offers the greatest benefit as a biological augment in these situations. Based on this systematic overview, we give a Level II recommendation that intra-operative use of PRPs at the bone-tendon interface can augment the healing rate, reduce re-tears, enhance the functional outcomes and mitigate pain in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

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

Background and aim. In 2019, specific diagnostic and antibiotic treatment recommendations for diabetic foot infection (DFI) and osteomyelitis (DFO) were introduced in our institution. They include principles on numbers of biopsies to obtain for microbiological/histopathological examinations, labeling anatomic localization, and antibiotic treatment (ABT) duration based on the aforementioned findings. ABT should be stopped after complete resection of infected bone. In case of incomplete resection, treatment is continued for 4–6 weeks. Two years after the introduction of these recommendations, we investigated the degree of implementation for hospitalized patients. Method. Adult patients with DFI/DFO undergoing surgical intervention from 01/2019–12/2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Diagnostic procedures were assigned to each episode when performed ≤30 days before surgical invention. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney-U tests were performed where appropriate. Results. We included 80 patients with 117 hospital episodes and 163 surgical interventions (mean 1.5 episodes and 2 interventions per patient). The mean age was 69.6 (SD 11.5) years, 75% were male. Vascular examination and MRI were performed in 70.9% and 74.4% of episodes, respectively. Impaired perfusion and DFO were confirmed in 34.9% and 56.3%, respectively. Blood cultures were sampled in 34.2%, bacteremia detected in 7.7% with S. aureus being the most common microorganism. Biopsies were obtained in 71.8% of operations, in 90.5% of those 3–5 samples. These were sent for histological examination in 63.2% of the interventions. In 43.6% the anatomic location was labeled ‘proximal to the resection margin’. Preoperative antibiotics were administered in 41.9% of the episodes because of concomitant soft-tissue infections. The most commonly used compound was amoxicillin/clavulanate (74.4%). ABT duration varied significantly when there were signs of DFO in preoperative MRI (p=0.015). The mean duration of antibiotic therapy was 9 (IQR 5–15) days in surgically cured episodes and 40.5 (IQR 15–42) days in cases with resection margins in non-healthy bone (p<0.0001). The results were similar when analyzing treatment duration with respect to osteomyelitis in histology: 13 (IQR 8–42) versus 29 (IQR 13–42) days, respectively (p=0.026). Conclusions. The adherence to recommendations in terms of biopsy sampling was excellent, moderate for sending samples to histology and poor for labeling the anatomic location. The adherence to ABT duration was good but can be improved by shortening treatment duration for surgically cured cases. Results of preoperative MRI appear to be influential on the decision-making for treatment duration

Aim. The current recommendation in Norway is to use four doses of a first-generation cephalosporin (cefazolin or cephalotin) as systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) the day of surgery in primary joint arthroplasty. Due to shortage of supply, scientific development, changed courses of treatment and improved antibiotic stewardship, this recommendation has been disputed. We therefore wanted to assess if one dose of SAP was non-inferior to four doses in preventing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary joint arthroplasty. Method. We included patients with primary hip- and knee arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register and the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register for the period 2005-2023. We included the most used SAPs (cephalotin, cefazolin, cefuroxime, cloxacillin and clindamycin), administered as the only SAP in 1-4 doses, starting preoperatively. Risk of revision (Hazard rate ratio; HRR) for PJI was estimated by Cox regression analyses with adjustment for sex, age, ASA class, duration of surgery, reason for- and type of arthroplasty, and year of primary arthroplasty. The outcome was 1-year reoperation or revision for PJI. Non-inferiority margins were calculated for 1, 2 and 3 doses versus reference of 4 doses of SAP at the day of surgery, against a predetermined limit of 15% increased risk of PJI. Results. In total 274,188 primary arthroplasties (total hip 133,985, hemi hip 51,442, and total knee 88,761) were included. Of these primary arthroplasties, 2,996 (1.1%) had subsequent revisions for PJI during the first postoperative year. One dose of SAP was given in 9,603 arthroplasties, two doses in 10,068, three doses in 18,351, and four doses in 236,166 arthroplasties. With the recommended four doses as reference, the HRR (95% CI) for 1-year revision for infection was 0.9 (0.7-1.1) for one dose, 1.0 (0.8-1.2) for two doses, and 0.9 (0.8-1.1) for three doses. The corresponding adjusted 1-year revision incidences for PJI was 0.9 (0.7-1.1), 1.0 (0.8-1.2), 0.9 (0. 8-1.1) and 1.0 (1.0-1.1) for one, two, three and four doses respectively, and less than four doses was found to be non-inferior. Conclusions. One preoperative dose of SAP in primary joint arthroplasty surgery seems to be non-inferior to the current recommendation of four doses of a first-generation cephalosporin as PJI-prophylaxis. This finding may simplify the course of treatment for arthroplasty patients, save costs, and improve antibiotic stewardship

Abstract. Introduction. Aseptic loosening is the most common cause of failure following cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and this has been linked to poor cementation technique. We aimed to develop a consensus on the optimal technique for component cementation in TKA. Methodology. A UK based, three round, online modified Delphi Expert Consensus Study was completed focussing on cementation technique in TKA. Experts were identified as having a minimum of 5 years Consultant experience in the NHS and fulfilling any one of the following three criteria:. · A ‘high volume’ knee arthroplasty practice (>150 TKA per annum) as identified from the National joint registry (NJR). · A senior author of at least 5 peer reviewed articles related to TKA in the previous 5 years. · A named trainer for a post CCT fellowship in TKA. Results. Eighty-one experts (Round 1) and eighty experts (Round 2 and 3) completed the Delphi Study. Four domains with a total of twenty-four statements were identified. 100% consensus was reached within the cement preparation, pressurisation, and cement curing domains. 90% consensus was reached within the cement application domain. Consensus was not reached with only one statement regarding the handling of cement during initial application to the tibial and/or femoral bone surfaces. Conclusion. The CeTIKS expert consensus study presents comprehensive recommendations on the optimal technique for component cementation in TKA. Expert opinion has a place in the hierarchy of evidence and until better evidence is available these recommendations should be considered when cementing a TKA

Hip precautions are currently practiced in three-quarters of trauma hospitals in the UK, despite national recommendations from the ‘Blue Book’ not stating it as a requirement. Valuable therapist time is utilised alongside the need for specialised equipment, which can potentially delay discharge whilst it is being arranged. Objective of this study was to explore the current practice of the use of hip precautions on discharge following hemiarthroplasty for hip fractures. To also explore whether they are necessary and to identify areas for improvement to benefit patient care overall. Online survey distributed to various Trauma and Orthopaedic Departments across the UK. Survey was available over a 4-month period, collecting 55 responses overall. Majority of responses were from trauma and orthopaedic consultants who were aware of the ‘Blue Book’ recommendations. The majority of trusts who responded did not practice hip precautions and did not feel this increased the risk of dislocations on discharge. Recommendations included integration of hip precautions in the post-op advice in coordination with the physiotherapist and information leaflets on discharge regarding hip precautions. Hip precautions were not commonly practiced, for reasons including patient compliance and the inherently stable procedure of a hemiarthroplasty compared to a THR, reducing the need for hip precautions. Hip precautions are not widely regarded as a useful practice for post-hip hemiarthroplasty, viewed as utilising more resources and increasing costs and risk due to increased hospital stay. Thus, this potentially delays discharge overall. A consistent approach should be implemented in treating patients post-hip hemiarthroplasty

The purpose of the this survey study was twofold: 1) to examine different aspects of satisfaction with post-operative care in injured workers who have undergone rotator cuff surgery and 2) to examine the relationship between receiving a newly implemented summary report and the overall satisfaction with surgery and recovery. The clinical communication summary report was given to injured workers following their review assessment to share with the family doctor or other health care providers. The form indicated a need for further assessments or investigations and return to work recommendations. The study involved using a satisfaction survey that examined different aspects of follow-up visit and workers’ opinion about their understanding of the nature of surgery, their progress, clinical management, and usefulness of the newly implemented summery report. Eighty patients completed the questionnaire (mean age: 54 (8), 62(78%) males, of whom 26 (34%) had a rotator cuff decompression and 31 (40%) had a rotator cuff repair with 20 (26%) having both procedures and three missing data. There were no statistically significant relationships between the patient demographics (age, sex or type of surgery) and satisfaction. However, there was a significant correlation between how patients perceived the summary report in terms of helpfulness and the overall satisfaction with surgery (FTE<0.0004, p=0.001) and the satisfaction with recovery (FTE<0.0001, p=0.001). This may indicate that improvement in worker's understanding of their treatment recommendations and restrictions is associated with higher levels of overall satisfaction in this population. Our results indicate a positive linear relationship between expressing a high satisfaction and the helpfulness of the summary report. As part of improving care, adding a summary report may facilitate sharing information with the injured workers, their care providers and their workplace

Neurological complications in oncological and degenerative spine surgery represent one of the most feared risks of these procedures. Multimodal intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) mainly uses methods to detect changes in the patient's neurological status in a timely manner, thus allowing actions that can reverse neurological deficits before they become irreversible. The utopian goal of spinal surgery is the absence of neurological complications while the realistic goal is to optimize the responses to changes in neuromonitoring such that permanent deficits occur less frequently as possible. In 2014, an algorithm was proposed in response to changes in neuromonitoring for deformity corrections in spinal surgery. There are several studies that confirm the positive impact that a checklist has on care. The proposed checklist has been specifically designed for interventions on stable columns which is significantly different from oncological and degenerative surgery. The goal of this project is to provide a checklist for oncological and degenerative spine surgery to improve the quality of care and minimize the risk of neurological deficit through the optimization of clinical decision-making during periods of intraoperative stress or uncertainty. After a literature review on risk factors and recommendations for responding to IONM changes, 3 surveys were administered to 8 surgeons with experience in oncological and degenerative spine surgery from 5 hospitals in Italy. In addition, anesthesiologists, intraoperative neuro-monitoring teams, operating room nurses participated. The members participated in the optimization and final drafting of the checklist. The authors reassessed and modified the checklist during 3 meetings over 9 months, including a clinical validation period using a modified Delphi process. A checklist containing 28 items to be considered in responding to the changes of the IONM was created. The checklist was submitted for inclusion in the new recommendations of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (SINC) for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring. The final checklist represents the consensus of a group of experienced spine surgeons. The checklist includes the most important and high-performance items to consider when responding to IONM changes in patients with an unstable spine. The implementation of this checklist has the potential to improve surgical outcomes and patient safety in the field of spinal surgery

Background and study purpose. Low back pain with no identified underlying cause is categorised as primary musculoskeletal pain by the International Association for the Study of Pain. In April 2021, the National Institute for Care and Excellence (NICE) published updated guidance for the management of primary chronic pain conditions in England. As part of the De-STRESS pain study, we explored the perspectives of GPs on the updated guideline and impact upon clinical practice. Methods and results. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 GPs in England. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison techniques. GPs agreed with the recommendations restricting pharmacological options for pain management and reflected that they now had an expert reference to back-up their decision-making and could use the guidance in potentially difficult conversations with patients. Frustration was expressed by GPs about the lack of alternative options to medication, as the non-pharmacological recommendations were difficult to implement, had lengthy waiting lists, or were unavailable in their locality. Conclusion. Although GPs discussed benefits of the updated NICE guideline in potentially reducing prescriptions of ineffective and potentially harmful medications, frustration about the lack of alternative strategies added to the difficulties encountered in managing people with persistent back pain in primary care. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This study was funded by Versus Arthritis – grant number 22454; Carolyn A Chew-Graham is part-funded by NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West Midlands

Background. NHS improvement advocates same day emergency care (SDEC) for patients requiring additional specialism than can be provided in an Emergency Department. A novel physiotherapist-led spinal SDEC unit was established in January 2020, integrated within the on-call spinal service. The aim of this paper was to evaluate patient and peer satisfaction with the spinal SDEC. Methods. Patient satisfaction questionnaires and/or friends and family tests were collected from patients over a six-month period. Questionnaires evaluated satisfaction with recommendations given, service given, staff friendliness. Anonymous, completed questionnaires were uploaded onto a spreadsheet. Peer satisfaction was assessed using a google sheets document emailed to interface, primary care and community services. The questionnaire captured the respondents’ role, how many patients they had referred to the SDEC, reasons for referral, ease of referral, and compared this new pathway with the previous pathway. All patient's satisfaction responses recommended the service to family and friends (n=110 extremely likely, 8 likely) (6% total seen). All respondents were satisfied with the service they received (n=80 very satisfied, n=12 satisfied) and recommendations made (n=86 very satisfied, n=6 satisfied). Of peer satisfaction, 26 respondents (n=12 (46%) physiotherapists, n=6 (23%) first contact practitioners, n=6 (23%) advanced practice physiotherapists, n=1 (4%) GP, n=1 (4%) nurse) reported the SDEC delivered a better pathway and outcomes (n=25, 96%), and 20 (77%) respondents reported favourable comments of the service and its impact on patients and referrers. Conclusion. Peer and patient satisfaction data support the use of a physiotherapist-led spinal SDEC in emergency and urgent spinal care pathways. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of Interest. Sources of interest: No sources of funding

Worldwide, most spine imaging is either “inappropriate” or “probably inappropriate”. The Choosing Wisely recommendation is “Do not perform imaging for lower back pain unless red flags are present.” There is currently no detailed breakdown of lower back pain diagnostic imaging performed in New Brunswick (NB) to inform future directions. A registry of spine imaging performed in NB from 2011-2019 inclusive (n=410,000) was transferred to the secure platform of the NB Institute for Data, Training and Research (NB-IRDT). The pseudonymized data included linkable institute identifiers derived from an obfuscated Medicare number, as well as information on type of imaging, location of imaging, and date of imaging. The transferred data did not include the radiology report or the test requisition. We included all lumbar, thoracic, and complete spine images. We excluded imaging related to the cervical spine, surgical or other procedures, out-of-province patients and imaging of patients under 19 years. We verified categories of X-ray, Computed Tomography (CT), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Red flags were identified by ICD-10 code-related criteria set out by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. We derived annual age- and sex-standardized rates of spine imaging per 100,000 population and examined regional variations in these rates in NB's two Regional Health Authorities (RHA-A and RHA-B). Age- and sex-standardized rates were derived for individuals with/without red flag conditions and by type of imaging. Healthcare utilization trends were reflected in hospital admissions and physician visits 2 years pre- and post-imaging. Rurality and socioeconomic status were derived using patients’ residences and income quintiles, respectively. Overall spine imaging rates in NB decreased between 2012 and 2019 by about 20% to 7,885 images per 100,000 people per year. This value may be higher than the Canadian average. Females had 23% higher average imaging rate than males. RHA-A had a 45% higher imaging rate than RHA-B. Imaging for red flag conditions accounted for about 20% of all imaging. X-rays imaging accounted for 67% and 75% of all imaging for RHA-A and RHA-B respectively. The proportions were 20% and 8% for CT and 13% and 17% for MRI. Two-year hospitalization rates and rates of physician visits were higher post-imaging. Females had higher age-standardized hospitalization and physician-visit rates, but the magnitude of increase was higher for males. Individuals with red flag conditions were associated with increased physician visits, regardless of the actual reason for the visit. Imaging rates were higher for rural than urban patients by about 26%. Individuals in the lowest income quintiles had higher imaging rates than those in the highest income quintiles. Physicians in RHA-A consistently ordered more images than their counterparts at RHA-B. We linked spine imaging data with population demographic data to look for variations in lumbar spine imaging patterns. In NB, as in other jurisdictions, imaging tests of the spine are occurring in large numbers. We determined that patterns of imaging far exceed the numbers expected for ‘red flag’ situations. Our findings will inform a focused approach in groups of interest. Implementing high value care recommendations pre-imaging ought to replace low-value routine imaging

AO Spine Guideline for Using Osteobiologics in Spine Degeneration project is an international collaborative initiative to identify and evaluate evidence on existing use of osteobiologics in spine degenerative diseases. It aims to formulate clinically relevant and internationally applicable guidelines ensuring evidence-based, safe and effective use of osteobiologics. The current focus is the use of osteobiologics in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgeries. The guideline development is planned in three phases. Phase 1- Evidence synthesis and Recommendation; Phase 2- Guideline with osteobiologics grading and Validation; Phase 3- Guideline dissemination and Development of a clinical decision support tool. The key questions formulating the guidelines for the use of osteobiologics will be addressed in a series of systematic reviews in Phase 1. The evidence synthesized by the systematic reviews will be assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology, including expert panel discussions to formulate a recommendation. In Phase 2, osteobiologics will be graded based on evidence and the grading will be integrated with the recommendation from Phase 1, and thus formulate a guideline. The guideline will be further validated by prospective clinical studies. In the third phase, dissemination of the proposed guideline and development of a decision support tool is planned. AO-GO aims to bridge an important gap between quality of evidence and use of osteobiologics in spine fusion surgeries. With a holistic approach the guideline aims to facilitate evidence-based, patient-oriented decision-making process in clinical practice, thus stimulating further evidence-based studies regarding osteobiologics usage in spine surgeries