Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access
Include Proceedings
Access
Journals
Abstracts
Dates
Year From
Year To
Specialties
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXIX | Pages 42 - 42
1 Sep 2012
Defining the rattle: A mechanical study of three different types of limb reconstruction frames
Smitham P Khan W Hazlerigg A Bajaj S McCarthy I Calder P
Full Access
View article

Introduction

Patients undergoing limb reconstruction with the Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) often perceive that their frame is loose due to the rattle they hear when mobilising. Our aim was to determine how much and where this movement is in the various frame/bone constructs currently on the market.

Method

Using standard tibial saw bones three frames (TSF, Ilizarov and Hexapod) were made in an identical fashion. Constructs were cyclically loaded 4 times to 200 N in tension and compression using the Instron MTS. This was repeated three times. A seventh strut was also placed in the TSF construct and the tests repeated. Bones were then removed and the tests repeated for the frames alone.

Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 310 - 310
1 Jul 2011
SIMPLE AND COST EFFICIENT CHANGES CAN ENABLE TRUSTS TO MEET CURRENT ACCEPTED STANDARDS OF HIP FRACTURE MANAGEMENT
Harrison T Hazlerigg A Dodd M Clark DL
Full Access
View article

Introduction: The first BOA “Standards for Trauma” detail clear management standards for hip fracture patients aged over sixty including the goal that surgery should be within 48 hours of admission. With an expanding elderly population and the number of people suffering a hip fracture increasing by 2% a year there will be an increasing burden on trauma services.

We have demonstrated that simple targeted changes can make a significant difference to wait till surgery after hip fracture.

Methods: Comprehensive data was gathered prospectively on all hip fracture admission over two 3 month periods one year apart. On the basis of the poor results in the first 3 months and after discussions with the general surgeons and anaesthetists, the following changes were implemented:

2pm to 5pm weekday trauma lists were extended from 2pm to 7pm two days a week.

Priority for one hip fracture case first thing on the CEPOD emergency list each day.

Fortnightly morning ‘day case’ trauma list for minor cases.

Results: Approximately 100 hip fracture admissions in both 3 month periods. Initially 72% of patients waited more than 48 hours, 75% of these were due to logistical reasons (mainly lack of space on trauma lists). The percentage of patients operated on within 48 hours improved from 28% to 95%.

Discussion: Auditing local practice against BOAST guidelines identified that logistical reasons (mainly lack of capacity) were the major cause for delay in our trust. Presenting and discussing these results with general surgical and anaesthetic colleagues enabled simple changes that allowed us to meet the new BOA targets.

Conclusion: We suggest that trusts audit their compliance with the new BOA standards for trauma. We have shown how this can be used to design simple improvements in service to significantly reduce waiting times for patients. Let us not write off conservative treatment of tibial shaft fractures

Image linking to Orthomedia