Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 6 | Pages 711 - 716
1 Jun 2023
Ali MS Khattak M Metcalfe D Perry DC

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between hip shape and mid-term function in Perthes’ disease. It also explored whether the modified three-group Stulberg classification can offer similar prognostic information to the five-group system.

Methods

A total of 136 individuals aged 12 years or older who had Perthes’ disease in childhood completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility score (function), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) (function), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) score (quality of life), and the numeric rating scale for pain (NRS). The Stulberg class of the participants’ hip radiographs were evaluated by three fellowship-trained paediatric orthopaedic surgeons. Hip shape and Stulberg class were compared to PROM scores.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 7 | Pages 815 - 820
1 Jul 2023
Mitchell PD Abraham A Carpenter C Henman PD Mavrotas J McCaul J Sanghrajka A Theologis T

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine the consensus best practice approach for the investigation and management of children (aged 0 to 15 years) in the UK with musculoskeletal infection (including septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, pyomyositis, tenosynovitis, fasciitis, and discitis). This consensus can then be used to ensure consistent, safe care for children in UK hospitals and those elsewhere with similar healthcare systems.

Methods

A Delphi approach was used to determine consensus in three core aspects of care: 1) assessment, investigation, and diagnosis; 2) treatment; and 3) service, pathways, and networks. A steering group of paediatric orthopaedic surgeons created statements which were then evaluated through a two-round Delphi survey sent to all members of the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery (BSCOS). Statements were only included (‘consensus in’) in the final agreed consensus if at least 75% of respondents scored the statement as critical for inclusion. Statements were discarded (‘consensus out’) if at least 75% of respondents scored them as not important for inclusion. Reporting these results followed the Appraisal Guidelines for Research and Evaluation.