Aims

To determine the impact of COVID-19 on orthopaediatric admissions and fracture clinics within a regional integrated care system (ICS).

The purpose of the study was to retrospectively assess the patients treated to date with the vac ulta system using a technique of antibiotic instillation.

The vac ulta system is licensed for use with anti-septic instillation fluid but we have now treated a number of patients with antibiotic instillation under the guidance of the microbiology department. All patients being treated with the vac ulta system were included in the study. There were no exclusions. Pathology treated, infecting organism, antibiotic used and length of treatment were all recorded. Any antibiotic related complications were noted. Treatment was judged successful with resolution of presenting symptoms, normalization of inflammatory markers and three negative foam cultures.

There were 21 patients included in the study. There were 13 male and 8 female patients. Length of treatment ranged from 1 week to 10 weeks with a mean of 4.2 weeks. Follow up ranged from 1 month to 42 months with a mean follow up of 17.9 months

The most common pathogen was Staph. Aureus(11 cases). Enterobacter, ESBL, Strep. Milleri, MRSA and Citrobacter were also treated. Antibiotics instilled included flucloxacillin, meropenem, gentamicin, vancomycin, meropenem and teicoplanin. There were no antibiotic reactions/allergies. Pathologies treated included osteomyelitis, two stage amputations for infection, infected non-union and infected metalwork. Infection recurred in 2 of 21 patients (10%), with one recurring at 18 months and one at 2 years.

The 90% treatment success rate is highly encouraging in this notoriously difficult group of patients to treat. In this series vac instill was an effective treatment of infection and allows antibiotic treatment to be targeted to the infected tissues. There were no adverse reactions seen.

Larger series with longer follow up are no needed but we believe this technique is safe, successful and easily administered can be cautiously adopted on a wider basis.

The accurate and detailed documentation of surgical procedures is essential, forming part of good clinical practice set out by the General Medical Council (GMC). In the case of knee arthroscopy, it is vital for planning further management when referring to a soft tissue knee specialist. This study assesses the quality of documentation of knee arthroscopy and evaluates the implementation of a novel operative template.

A retrospective study of 50 operative-notes of patients undergoing knee arthroscopy was completed. A 41-point assessment was made based on guidelines from the GMC, Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCSE), British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) and British Association for Surgery of the Knee (BASK).

An operative-note template was devised to address the criteria important for further interventions and then assessed for its efficacy in providing appropriately detailed findings.

Detailed documentation deemed essential by current guidelines were lacking the minimum standards expected. Criteria that were considered necessary for an arthroscopic procedure were as low as 4%. After instigating the new operative template, there was a statistically significant increase (p < 0.001) in documentation accuracy throughout the necessary criteria set out by the GMC, RCSE, BOA and BASK.

We have devised an operative template for knee arthroscopy that improves the quality of documentation and allows for optimal further surgical planning. Clear documentation is important for patient safety, adequate referral to a specialist, research and coding purposes. This will ideally reduce the number of repeat knee arthroscopies performed and optimise patient care from the outset.