This work aims to quantitatively assess the current opinions of foot and ankle surgery provision by podiatric surgeons within the UK. Three groups were targeted by postal questionnaire; Orthopaedic surgeons with membership to BOFAS, Orthopaedic surgeons not affiliated to the specialist foot and ankle society and surgical Podiatrists. In addition we aim to identify areas of conflict and suggestions for future integration. A postal questionnaire was sent to all Fellows of the Faculty of Podiatric Surgery, College of Podiatrists (136), members of the British Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society, (156), and a randomly selected number of Fellows of the British Orthopaedic Association, who are not members of BOFAS (250). We have received replies from 99 (73%) of the Podiatric Surgical group, 77 (49%) of the Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle surgeons and 66 (26%) from non-Foot and Ankle Orthopaedic Surgeons. Respondents were asked to detail their present practice and issues that they considered to restrict closer working between Orthopaedic Surgeons and Podiatric surgeons. Additionally, each surgeon was given a range of surgical procedures and asked to identify the most appropriate surgical profession to undertake the procedure. The good response rate amongst Foot and Ankle Practitioners (both Podiatric and Orthopaedic) reflects the interest in these issues compared to Orthopaedic Surgeons from other sub-specialties. Poor understanding of Podiatric surgical training, impact on private practice and medical protectionism were areas identified by podiatric respondents. Conflicts over job-title, concerns over training, role boundaries and responsibilities were identified by Orthopaedic respondents as being significant restrictors to further integration. The paper will present the full results of the survey and discuss the suitability and feasibility of closer working practices between Orthopaedic and Podiatric surgeons

Purpose: An audit was undertaken to evaluate the patients’ experience of foot surgery at the great Western Hospital in 2004 following the appointment of a podiatric surgeon to the orthopaedic department.

Method: The first 100 patients that were operated on by the podiatric surgeon (Group 1) were matched by OPCS code to a randomly selected patient cohort that had been operated on by orthopaedic surgeons (Group 2). All patients were at a minimum of 6 months post-surgery (range 6–10 months Gp. 1, 11–20 months Gp. 2). The audit department sent out an anonymous questionnaire relating to the patients’ experience both before and after their surgery as well as current levels of satisfaction with the outcome of their surgery.

Results: The response rate was 64% in Gp.1 and 68% in Gp.2.

The patients’ overall satisfaction with the result of their foot surgery was determined using a Likert scale and the results can be seen in Table 1.

Patients in the podiatric surgical group were significantly more satisfied with the result of their foot surgery than those in the orthopaedic group (p< 0.008; Mann Whitney U test).

Similar statistically significant differences were also seen between the two groups relating to patient satisfaction with their pre and post-operative consultations and information concerning their proposed surgery and its outcome.

Conclusion: The results of this audit suggest that the satisfaction of patients following foot surgery can rise significantly following the appointment of a podiatric surgeon to a general hospital orthopaedic department.