Aims. This study assesses patient barriers to successful telemedicine care in orthopaedic practices in a large academic practice in the COVID-19 era. Methods. In all, 381 patients scheduled for telemedicine visits with three orthopaedic surgeons in a large academic practice from 1 April 2020 to 12 June 2020 were asked to participate in a telephone survey using a standardized Institutional Review Board-approved script. An unsuccessful telemedicine visit was defined as patient-reported difficulty of use or reported dissatisfaction with teleconferencing. Patient barriers were defined as explicitly reported barriers of unsatisfactory visit using a process-based satisfaction metric. Statistical analyses were conducted using analysis of variances (ANOVAs), ranked ANOVAs, post-hoc pairwise testing, and chi-squared independent analysis with 95% confidence interval. Results. The survey response rate was 39.9% (n = 152). The mean age of patients was 51.1 years (17 to 85), and 55 patients (38%) were male. Of 146 respondents with completion of survey, 27 (18.5%) reported a barrier to completing their telemedicine visit. The majority of patients were satisfied with using telemedicine for their orthopaedic appointment (88.8%), and found the experience to be easy (86.6%). Patient-reported barriers included lack of proper equipment/internet connection (n = 13; 8.6%), scheduling difficulty (n = 2; 1.3%), difficulty following directions (n = 10; 6.6%), and patient-reported discomfort (n = 2; 1.3%). Barriers based on patient characteristics were age > 61 years, non-English primary language, inexperience with video conferencing, and unwillingness to try telemedicine prior to COVID-19. Conclusion. The barriers identified in this study could be used to screen patients who would potentially have an unsuccessful telemedicine visit, allowing practices to provide assistance to patients to reduce the risk of an unsuccessful visit. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):745–751

Telemedicine is the delivery of healthcare from a remote location using integrated computer/communication technology. This systematic review aims to explore evidence for telemedicine in orthopaedics to determine its advantages, validity, effectiveness and utilisation particularly during our current pandemic where patient contact is limited. Databases of PubMed, Scopus and CINHAL were systematically searched and articles were included if they involved any form of telephone or video consultation in an orthopaedic population. Findings were synthesised into four themes: patient/clinician satisfaction, accuracy and validity of examination, safety and patient outcomes and cost effectiveness. Quality assessment was undertaken using Cochrane and Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools. Twenty studies were included consisting of nine RCTs across numerous orthopaedic subspecialties including fracture care, elective orthopaedics and oncology. Studies revealed high patient satisfaction with telemedicine for convenience, less waiting and travelling time. Telemedicine was cost effective particularly if patients had to travel long distances, required hospital transport or time off work. No clinically significant differences were found in patient examination nor measurement of patient reported outcome measures. Telemedicine was reported to be a safe method of consultation. However, studies were of variable methodological quality with selection bias. In conclusion, evidence suggests that telemedicine in orthopaedics can be safe, cost effective, valid in clinical assessment with high patient/clinician satisfaction. Further work with high quality RCTs is required to elucidate long term outcomes. This systematic review presents up-to-date evidence on the use of telemedicine and provides data for organisations considering its use in the current COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a swift adoption of telehealth in orthopaedic surgery. This study aimed to analyze the satisfaction of patients and surgeons with the rapid expansion of telehealth at this time within the division of adult reconstructive surgery at a major urban academic tertiary hospital. Methods. A total of 334 patients underging arthroplasty of the hip or knee who completed a telemedicine visit between 30 March and 30 April 2020 were sent a 14-question survey, scored on a five-point Likert scale. Eight adult reconstructive surgeons who used telemedicine during this time were sent a separate 14-question survey at the end of the study period. Factors influencing patient satisfaction were determined using univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling. Results. A total of 68 patients (20.4%) and 100% of the surgeons completed the surveys. Patients were “Satisfied” with their telemedicine visits (4.10/5.00 (SD 0.98)) and 19 (27.9%) would prefer telemedicine to in-person visits in the absence of COVID-19. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling revealed that patients were more likely to be satisfied if their surgeon effectively responded to their questions or concerns (odds ratio (OR) 3.977; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.260 to 13.190; p = 0.019) and if their visit had a high audiovisual quality (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.052 to 6.219; p = 0.042). Surgeons were “Satisfied” with their telemedicine experience (3.63/5.00 (SD 0.92)) and were “Fairly Confident” (4.00/5.00 (SD 0.53)) in their diagnostic accuracy despite finding the physical examinations to be only “Slightly Effective” (1.88/5.00 (SD 0.99)). Most adult reconstructive surgeons, seven of eight (87.5%) would continue to use telemedicine in the future. Conclusion. Telemedicine emerged as a valuable tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients undergoing arthroplasty and their surgeons were satisfied with telemedicine and see a role for its use after the pandemic. The audiovisual quality and the responsiveness of physicians to the concerns of patients determine their satisfaction. Future investigations should focus on improving the physical examination of patients through telemedicine and strategies for its widespread implementation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):196–204

Aims. The purpose of this study was to determine the access to and ability to use telemedicine technology in adult patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to determine associations with the socioeconomic characteristics of the patients, including age, sex, race, and education. We also sought to understand the patients’ perceived benefits, risks, and preferences when dealing with telemedicine. Methods. We performed a cross-sectional survey involving patients awaiting primary THA and TKA by one of six surgeons at a single academic institution. Patients were included and called for a telephone-administered survey if their surgery was scheduled to be between 23 March and 2 June 2020, and were aged > 18 years. Results. The response rate was 52% (189 of 363 patients). A total of 170 patients (90.4%) reported using the internet, 177 (94.1%) reported owning a device capable of videoconferencing, and 143 (76.1%) had participated in a video call in the past year. When asked for their preferred method for a consultation, 155 (82.8%) and 26 (13.9%) ranked in-person and a videoconference as their first choice, respectively. The perceived benefits of telemedicine consultations included reduced travel to appointments (165 (88.2%) agreed) and reduced cost of attending appointments (123 (65.8%) agreed). However, patients were concerned that they would not establish the same patient-physician connection (100 (53.8%) agreed), and would not receive the same level of care (52 (33.2%) agreed) using telemedicine consultations compared with in-person consultations. Conclusion. Most patients undergoing arthroplasty have access to and are capable of using the technology required for telemedicine consultations. However, they still prefer in-person consultations due to concerns that they will not establish the same patient-physician connection and will not receive the same level of care, despite the benefits of reducing the time spent in travelling and the cost of attending appointments, and the appointments being easier to attend. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):98–102

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered transformative change in how clinicians interact with their patients. There has been a shift away from face-to-face toward virtual consultations. However, the evidence to support this change in practice is unclear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence base for virtual consultations for orthopaedics. Materials and Methods. Two independent reviewers performed a literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus databases. Only studies reporting outcomes following the use of telemedicine for diagnosis, consultation, rehabilitation, and follow-up were included. Outcomes analyzed were: 1) Patient and clinician satisfaction, 2) Clinical outcome measures, and 3) Cost analysis of traditional vs teleconsultation. Results. A total of 41 studies were included. Fifteen studies compared clinical outcomes of telemedicine against a matched traditional cohort. Of these 15 studies, two demonstrated non-inferiority, nine showed no statistically significant difference and four found telemedicine to be superior. Eleven studies recorded patient reported outcomes, which demonstrated high patient satisfaction. Nine studies reported decreased costs when telemedicine was compared to traditional care. The remaining 6 studies had varied aims and methodologies that didn't fit well with any of these sub-headings. Conclusion. While the available evidence is limited, the studies assessed in this systematic review show that telemedicine can deliver high quality healthcare with good clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction in a cost effective manner. Further studies are required to validate telemedicine for specific trauma and orthopaedic diagnoses

Introduction. Adjusting an external fixator can be a daunting process for patients. Despite comprehensive training, patients often request supervision for the initial adjustments which may result in a prolonged hospital stay. Following the introduction of telemedicine during the pandemic we believed that this could be utilised to support patients with their fixator adjustments. A quality improvement project was implemented to assess and evaluate a change in practice from existing Face to Face support to a telemedicine format. The aim of the project was to reduce median length of stay (LOS). Materials & Methods. The telemedicine platform was introduced in our unit from April 2021 with the change in practice. Using the life QI platform, run charts were used to record the numbers of patients whose LOS was 4 days or less. Median LOS was assessed prior to and following introduction of the telemedicine platform. Service user experience with telemedicine as well as overall training and education by the CNS team was sought through on-line questionnaires. Results. Baseline data collected from April 2019 to April 2021 showed that our median LOS for patients undergoing external fixation was 6 days with 36% of patients being discharged at day 4 or earlier. After implementation of telemedicine, median LOS reduced to 4 days with 50% of patients leaving hospital in 4 days or less. Service user responses demonstrated that 100% felt that sufficient information was provided by the CNS team, a mean score of 8.4/10 was reported when asked how confident they were when adjusting the fixator. When asked how the service could be improved access to a recorded video was suggested. Conclusions. Initial fixator adjustment support via telemedicine is not appropriate for all of our patient group due to a lack of access or co-morbidities/ social issues that necessitate a prolonged hospital stay. However, this project has demonstrated that it has had positive long-term benefits within our service through reducing our median length of stay by 2 days without compromising patient satisfaction with their care

A significant proportion of patient transfers in Ontario are from long-term care facilities for consultation of musculoskeletal (MSK) issues. These transfers are costly for patients and the healthcare system. This study evaluated the utility of a Telemedicine MSK (TeleMSK) service for long-term care patients requiring an orthopaedic consultation. A cross-sectional study was used to assess TeleMSK from September 2018 to April 2019. 26 long-term care facilities participated in this study, which included 32 long-term care patients assessed via TeleMSK and 27 telemedicine liaisons. Telemedicine Satisfaction Scale (TeSS) and the Telemedicine Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) surveys were used to evaluate the usefulness of the TeleMSK program. Patients and families rated voice (64.3%) and visual (71.4%) quality of TeleMSK to be excellent as well as the length of consultation (92.9%). 78.6% participants rated explanations from physicians to be excellent, 92.9% of the participants rated the carefulness, skillfulness, respect, and sensitivity of the attending physician to be excellent (85.7%). Patients felt privacy and confidentiality was maintained and respected throughout the consultation. The majority of telemedicine liaisons agreed that TeleMSK improved accessibility and productivity of consultations and 81.5% of the telemedicine liaisons strongly agreed that they would use TeleMSK again in the future. TeleMSK allowed for accessible, timely orthopaedic consultations without compromising the quality of patient care. Patients, families, and telemedicine liaisons rated their experience and use of TeleMSK as excellent. Barriers to healthcare are important issues to be addressed in the long term care population. This can be conducted efficiently and effectively with Telemedicine

Introduction. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a swift adoption of telehealth in orthopedic surgery. The purpose of this study was to analyze patient and surgeon satisfaction with a rapid expansion of telehealth use during COVID-19 pandemic within the division of adult reconstructive surgery at a major urban academic hospital. Methods. 334 hip and knee arthroplasty patients who completed a telemedicine visit from March 30th, 2020 through April 30th, 2020 were sent a 14-question survey. Eight adult reconstructive surgeons who used telemedicine were sent a separate 14-question survey at the end of the study period. Factors influencing patient satisfaction were determined using univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression modeling. Results. 20.4% of patients (68/334) and 100% of surgeons (8/8) completed the surveys. Patients were on average “Satisfied” with their telemedicine visits (4.10/5.00 ± 0.98), 54.4% considered themselves high-risk for COVID-19 complications, and 27.9% reported that they preferred future visits to be conducted using telemedicine for reasons unrelated to COVID-19. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression modeling revealed that patients reported higher satisfaction if their surgeon effectively responded to their questions/concerns (OR 3.977; 95% CI 1.260 to 13.190, p=0.019) and if their visit had higher audiovisual quality (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.052 to 6.219, p=0.042). Surgeons were “Satisfied” with their telemedicine experience (3.63/5.00 ± 0.92), felt that physical exams conducted via telemedicine were “Slightly Effective” (1.88/5.00 ± 0.99), and believed that 43.5% of visits required an in-person component. Most adult reconstructive surgeons would continue to use telemedicine in the future (87.5%). Conclusion. Telehealth emerged as a valuable tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Arthroplasty patients and surgeons were generally satisfied with telehealth and see a role for telehealth after the pandemic. Future investigations should explore how to improve telehealth physical examinations and identify which types of visits and patient concerns are reliably addressed using telehealth

Introduction. The purpose of the study was to determine access to and, ability to use telemedicine technology in an adult hip and knee reconstruction patient population and we seek to understand these patients' perceived benefits, risks and preferences of telemedicine. Methods. We performed a cross-sectional telephone administered survey on patients scheduled to undergo primary THA and TKA by one of six surgeons at a single academic institution between March 23 and June 2, 2020. Results. 163 patients were contacted and 113 (69.3%) completed the survey. Of the patients that completed surveys, 88% of patients reported using the internet with 94% reporting owning a device capable of videoconferencing. 78% of patients had participated in a video call in the past year and 37% having done a video visit with their physician. When asked for their preferred method for a physician visit, 80% ranked in-person as their first choice, followed by 18% preferring a video visit. Perceived benefits of telemedicine visits included reduced travel to appointments (87% agree or strongly agree) and reduced cost of attending appointments (63% agree or strongly agree). However, patients were concerned that they would not establish the same patient-physician connection (51% agree or strongly agree) and would not receive the same level of care (33% agree or strongly agree) through telemedicine visits versus in person visits. Conclusion. The majority of total hip and knee arthroplasty patients have access to and are capable of using the technology required for telemedicine visits. However, patients still prefer to have in person visit over concern that they will not establish the same patient-physician connection and will not receive the same level of care, despite benefits of reduced time spent traveling to and cost of attending appointments, and making it easier to attend appointments

Aims. In the UK, the NHS generates an estimated 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (4% to 5% of the nation’s total carbon emissions) and produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. There is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery and the environmentally sustainable initiatives undertaken to address this. The secondary aim of this study was to describe the barriers to making sustainable changes within orthopaedic surgery. Methods. A literature search was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines through EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed libraries using two domains of terms: “orthopaedic surgery” and “environmental sustainability”. Results. A total of 13 studies were included in the final analysis. All papers studied the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery in one of three areas: waste management, resource consumption, and carbon emissions. Waste segregation was a prevalent issue and described by nine studies, with up to 74.4% of hazardous waste being generated. Of this, six studies reported recycling waste and up to 43.9% of waste per procedure was recyclable. Large joint arthroplasties generated the highest amount of recyclable waste per procedure. Three studies investigated carbon emissions from intraoperative consumables, sterilization methods, and through the use of telemedicine. One study investigated water wastage and demonstrated that simple changes to practice can reduce water consumption by up to 63%. The two most common barriers to implementing environmentally sustainable changes identified across the studies was a lack of appropriate infrastructure and lack of education and training. Conclusion. Environmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery is a growing area with a wide potential for meaningful change. Further research to cumulatively study the carbon footprint of orthopaedic surgery and the wider impact of environmentally sustainable changes is necessary. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):628–640

The Defence Medical Services (DMS) Telemedicine Unit won awards for innovation from the British Computer Society in 1998 and the current version of the software went live on 7. th. April 2003. We present a review of the referrals made to the Unit from April 2003 to March 2005. Over this two-year period the Unit received 110 referrals from areas such as Falkland Islands, Bosnia, Ghana, HMS Ocean and Belize. We consider the referral patterns; reporting times; ease of use; and clinical consequences of the system

Introduction: The centre provides hand services to remote hospitals which require patients to travel long distances at odd hours for assessment and consenting to their operation only to be done at a later date in day surgery unit unless otherwise indicated. Aims: Compare video conferencing to patient and surgeon ‘face to face’ consultation in counselling of patients prior to surgery. Methods: Four injuries (Nail bed, extensor tendon, nerve repair, wrist laceration) were identified for which operative management was clear. 10 plastic surgery SHOs were shown photographs of the patients injury and asked to ‘counsel’ the ‘patient’(played by consultant plastic surgeon) with regards to the intended benefits, risks and complications of surgery. The assessment was done for all four scenarios both in person and over a video conference link (AHMS). The order of each case was varied to minimise ‘rehearsal’ of the consent. The consent process was scored on a number of points followed by rating. SHOs acted as their own controls removing bias of differing levels of knowledge. Results: The mean counselling time was 6 minutes/session. Equipments functioned reliably with audio and speed rated as excellent. Quality of councelling sessions using telemedicine was considered by consultants as good (32/40) to satisfactory (8/40) and was found comparable to in person councelling in obtaining consent. Conclusion: Telemedicine is as effective as specialist-on site counselling for non-controversial hand injuries and thereby reduces the movement of patients from remote A& E departments to plastic surgery units for consent and booking of their surgery

Telehealth has the potential to change the way we approach patient care. From virtual consenting to reducing carbon emissions, costs, and waiting times, it is a powerful tool in our clinical armamentarium. There is mounting evidence that remote diagnostic evaluation and decision-making have reached an acceptable level of accuracy and can safely be adopted in orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, patients’ and surgeons’ satisfaction with virtual appointments are comparable to in-person consultations. Challenges to the widespread use of telehealth should, however, be acknowledged and include the cost of installation, training, maintenance, and accessibility. It is also vital that clinicians are conscious of the medicolegal and ethical considerations surrounding the medium and adhere strictly to the relevant data protection legislation and storage framework. It remains to be seen how organizations harness the full spectrum of the technology to facilitate effective patient care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):843–849.

PROBLEM. Since the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020, there has been a marked rise in the use of telemedicine to evaluate patients following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Telemedicine is helpful to maintain patient contact, but it cannot provide objective functional TKA data. External monitoring devices can be used, but in the past have had mixed results due to patient compliance and data continuity, particularly for monitoring over numerous years. This novel stem is a translational product with an embedded sensor that can remotely monitor patient activity following TKA. SOLUTION. The Canturio™ TE∗ System (Canary Medical) functions structurally as a tibial extension for the Persona® cemented tibial plate (Zimmer Biomet). The stem is instrumented with internal motion sensors (3-D accelerometer and gyroscope) and telemetry that collects and transmits kinematic data. Raw data is converted by analytics into clinically relevant gait metrics using a proprietary algorithm. The Canturio™ TE∗ will monitor the patient's gait daily for the first year and then with lower frequency thereafter to conserve battery power enabling the potential for 20 years of longitudinal data collection and analysis. A base station in the OR activates the device and links the stem and data to the patient. A base station in the patient's home collects and uploads data to the Cloud Based Canary Data Management Platform (Canary Medical). The Canary Cloud is structured as an FDA regulated and HIPPA-compliant database with cybersecurity protocols integrated into the architecture. A third base station is an accessory used in the health care professional's office to perform an on-demand gait analysis of a patient. A dashboard allows the health care professional and patient to monitor objective data of the patient's activity and progress post treatment. MARKET. The early target market for this device includes total joint surgeons who are early adopters of technology and currently utilize technology in their practice. The kinematic data provided by the Canturio™ TE∗ System will enable clinicians to augment patient care by reviewing their objective gait metrics. In the future, this data has the potential to be integrated with other Zimmer Biomet technologies, such as the Rosa™ Knee robotic platform, mymobility™, and sensored devices like iAssist™, to provide the surgeon with a complete pre-surgical functional assessment, intraoperative data, and post-operative functional data. PRODUCT. Persona IQ will be the combination of the proven Persona personalized total knee system with the Canary Medical Canturio™ TE∗. TIMING AND FUNDING. The Canturio™ TE is currently under De Novo FDA review for market clearance; it is not yet available for commercial distribution. The plan is to launch the product in 2021 pending regulatory De Novo grant. This effort is a partnership between Zimmer Biomet and Canary Medical. ∗ The Canturio™ - TE is currently under De Novo FDA review for market clearance; it is not yet available for commercial distribution

Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthritis is a common and disabling condition that can be treated with an operative procedure. Before operative measures, patients typically undergo conservative treatment utilizing methods such as physical therapy and injections. This study aims to determine what clinical modalities are being used for preoperative evaluation and nonoperative therapy and the associated cost prior to operative intervention. We queried Truven Market Scan, a large insurance provider database to identify patients undergoing CMC arthroplasty from 2010 to 2017. Patients were identified by common Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for CMC arthroplasty. All associated CPT codes listed for each patient during the 1 year period prior to operative intervention were collected and filtered to only include those codes associated with the ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes relating to CMC arthritis. The codes were then categorized as office visits, x-ray, injections, physical therapy, medical devices, and preoperative labs. The frequency and associated cost for each category was determined. There were 44,676 patients who underwent CMC arthroplasty during the study period. A total of $26,319,848.36 was charged during the preoperative period, for an average of $589.13 per patient. The highest contributing category to overall cost was office visits (42.1%), followed by injections (13.5%), and then physical therapy (11.1%). The most common diagnostic modality was x-ray, which was performed in 74.7% of patients and made up 11.0% of total charges. Only 49% of patients received at least one injection during the preoperative period and the average number of injections per patient was 1.72. Patients who were employed full time were more likely to receive two or more injections prior to surgery compared to patients who had retired (47% of full-time workers; 34% of retirees). The modalities used for the preoperative evaluation and conservative treatment of CMC arthritis and the associated cost are important to understand in order to determine the most successful and cost-effective treatment plan for patients. Surprisingly, despite the established evidence supporting clinical benefits, many patients do not undergo corticosteroid injections. With office visits being the largest contributor to overall costs, further inquiry into the necessity of multiple visits and efforts to combine visits, can help to reduce cost. Also, with the advent of telemedicine it may be possible to reduce visit cost by utilizing virtual medicine. Determining the best use of telemedicine and its effectiveness are areas for future investigation

Smartphones are often equipped with inertial sensors capable of measuring individuals' physical activities. Their role in monitoring the patients' physical activities in telemedicine, however, needs to be explored. The main objective of this study was to explore the correlation between a participant's daily step counts and the daily step counts reported by their smartphone. This prospective observational study was conducted on patients undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgery and a group of non-patients. The data collection period was from 2 weeks before until four weeks after the surgery for the patients and two weeks for the non-patients. The participants' daily steps were recorded by physical activity trackers employed 24/7, and an application recorded the number of daily steps registered by the participants' smartphones. We compared the cross-correlation between the daily steps time-series taken from the smartphones and physical activity trackers in different groups of participants. We also employed mixed modeling to estimate the total number of steps. Overall, 1067 days of data were collected from 21 patients (11 females) and 10 non-patients (6 females). The cross-correlation coefficient between the smartphone and physical activity tracker was 0.70 [0.53–0.83]. The correlation in the non-patients was slightly higher than in the patients (0.74 [0.60–0.90] and 0.69 [0.52–0.81], respectively). Considering the ubiquity, convenience, and practicality of smartphones, the high correlation between the smartphones and the total daily step time-series highlights the potential usefulness of smartphones in detecting the change in the step counts in remote monitoring of the patient's physical activity

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:222–228