Blood tests including liver function tests (LFTs), C-reactive protein (CRP), coagulation screens and international normalising ratios (INR) are frequently requested investigations that complement the surgical and anaesthetic pre-operative assessment of patients. The paucity of guidance available for blood requesting in acute trauma and orthopaedic admissions can lead to inappropriate requesting practices and over investigation. Unnecessary tests place an economic burden on a hospital and repeated venepuncture is unpleasant for patients. We audited blood requesting practices and with multidisciplinary input developed guidelines to improve practice which were subsequently implemented. Admissions over a period of one month to Ninewells Hospital and Perth Royal Infirmary were audited retrospectively. The frequency and clinical indications for LFTs, coagulation screens/INR and CRP for the duration of the patient's admission were recorded. Re-audit was carried out for one month after the introduction of the guidelines. 216 patients were included in January and 236 patients in September 2014. Total no. of LFTs requested: January 895, September 336 (−62.5%). Total no of coagulation screens/INR requested: January 307, September 210 (−31.6%). Total number of CRPs requested: January 894, September 317 (−64.5%). No. of blood requests per patient: January (M=4.81, SD 4.75), September (M=3.60, SD = 4.70). A significant decrease was observed in admission requesting and subsequent monitoring (p<0.01) for LFTs, coagulation screens/INR, CRP when the guidance was introduced. The implementation of the bloods guidance resulted in a large reduction in admission requesting and subsequent monitoring without incident. The cost of investigation was significantly reduced, as were venepuncture rates.
Involvement in research forms a mandatory part of Trauma & Orthopaedic specialty training. Evidence of publication is a compulsory criterion for attaining Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT). The publishing behaviour of orthopaedic trainees from all four deaneries in Scotland was examined (East, North, South East and West of Scotland). A literature search was performed for Scottish orthopaedic trainees achieving CCT between July 2005–July 2010 using Knowledge Network and PubMed databases. Data collected included date of publication, article type, journal, publishing institute, number of authors and position of trainee within authors. There was no significant difference in mean number of publications/trainee prior to specialty training across the four deaneries (EOS 0.18; NOS 0.18; SES 0.25; WOS 0.73). The number of publications/trainee during training was statistically significantly higher in SES (mean 6.31; mode 9; median 4) compared to WOS (2.23;0;1), NOS (2.18;1;2) and EOS (1.72;1;1). However, there was no correlation between a trainee's number of publications during training and post–CCT. There was no significant difference for mean number of authors/trainee publication during training across the four deaneries (range 3.38–3.63), nor mean position of trainee in list of authors (range 1.37–1.67). This study highlights important differences and notable similarities in publishing behaviour during orthopaedic training across the Scottish deaneries. It suggests that rates of publication relate to factors during training and that publishing during training is not predictive of future behaviour. This research may be of interest to trainees, training committees and orthopaedic departments in future appointments.
