Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip (DDH) is the most common orthopaedic disorder in newborns. Whilst the Pavlik harness is one of the most frequently used treatments for DDH, there is immense variability in treatment parameters reported in the literature and in clinical practice, leading to difficulties in standardising teaching and comparing outcomes. In the absence of definitive quantitative evidence for the optimal Pavlik harness management strategy in DDH, we addressed this problem by scientifically obtaining international expert-based consensus on the same.

An initial list of items relevant to Pavlik harness treatment was derived by systematic review of the literature according to PRISMA criteria and reviewed by two expert clinicians in DDH management. Delphi methodology was used to guide serial rounds of surveying and feedback to content matter experts from the International Hip Dysplasia Institute (IHDI), a collaborative group of paediatric orthopaedic surgeons with expertise in the management of DDH. Rounds of surveying continued in the same manner until consensus was reached.

Importance ratings were derived from each round of surveying by calculating median score responses on the 5-point Likert scale for each item. Items requiring clarification or those with a median score of below 4 (“agree”) were modified as needed prior to each subsequent round. Consensus was considered reached when 90% or more of the items had an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤ 1. This value indicates low sample deviation and is accepted as having achieved consensus. This was followed by a corroboration of face validity to derive the final set of management principles.

The literature search and expert review identified an initial list of 66 items in 8 categories relevant to Pavlik harness management. Four rounds of structured surveying were required to reach consensus. Following a final round of face validity, a definitive list of 33 items in 8 categories met consensus by the experts. These items were tabulated and presented as “General Principles of Pavlik Harness Treatment for DDH” and “Pavlik Harness Treatment by Severity of Hip Dysplasia”. Furthermore, highly contentious items were identified as important future areas of study and will be discussed.

We have developed a comprehensive set of principles derived by expert consensus to assist clinicians, and for use as a teaching resource, in the non-operative management of DDH using the Pavlik harness. We have gained consensus on both the general principles of Pavlik harness treatment as well as the detailed treatment of hip subtypes seen across the spectrum of pathology of DDH. Furthermore, this study has also served to generate a list of the most controversial areas in the non-operative management of DDH which should be considered high priority for future study to further refine and optimise the outcomes of children with developmental hip dysplasia.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the reasons for delay to surgery are secondary to health system constraints or patient factors. This study explored factors that contribute to patients' delay to surgery as well as how patients perceive the delay in surgery to have affected their treatment and care.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 patients aged 18 to 50 years old who had undergone arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. Qualitative data analysis was performed in accordance with the Straus and Corbin theory to derive codes, categories and themes.

Patient interviews revealed three overarching themes regarding delay to ACL reconstruction surgery: access to care, finances and work, and personal advocacy. Elements of those factors were shown to influence the timing of ACL reconstruction surgery. Less common factors included choice of imaging study (i.e., ultrasound), geography, and family commitments.

Patients' perceptions of delay in access to care was overwhelming due to the wait time for MRI. Several patients also described significant self-advocacy required to navigate the healthcare system, suggesting that some level of medical literacy may be necessary to gain timely access to surgery. Once patients had seen the surgeon, few patients described untimely delay to surgery, suggesting that OR resources are adequate. Recommendations to decrease delays to ACL reconstruction surgery include better access to MRI and broader education of non-surgical healthcare providers to help navigate access to surgery.

There has been a widespread adoption of training programs or “boot-camps” targeting new surgical residents prior to entrance to the hospital environment. A plethora of studies have shown positive reactions to implementations of “boot camps”. Reaction surveys, however, lack the ability to provide a deeper level of understanding into how and why “boot camps” are seen as effective. The purpose of this study was to develop a rich perspective on the role “boot camps” are perceived to play in resident education.

A constructivist approach to qualitative grounded theory methodology, employing iterative semi-structured, in-person, interviews was used to explore the construct of a “boot camp” through the eyes of key stakeholders, including junior surgical residents (n=10), senior surgical residents (n=5), and faculty members (n=5) at a major academic centre. Interviews were coded and analysed thematically using NVIVO software. Three members of the research team coded data independently and compared themes until consensus was reached. A method of constant comparative analysis was utilised throughout the iterative process. Emerging themes were revisited with stakeholders as a measure of rigor. Axial coding of themes was used to discover the overlying purposes embedded in the “boot camp” construct.

The overarching themes resonating from participants were ‘anxiety reduction’, ‘cognitive unloading’ and ‘practical logistics’. Resident anxiety was ameliorated through subthemes of ‘social inclusion’, ‘group formation’, ‘confidence building’ and ‘formalisation of expectations’. A resident commented “the nuances of how things work is more stressful than the actual job.” Residents bonded together to create personal and group identities, “forming the identity of who we are as a group”, that shaped ongoing learning throughout training, “right from the beginning we would be able to call on each other.” Junior residents found themselves cognitively unloaded for higher level learning through ‘expectation setting’ and ‘formalised basic skills’; “I knew how the equipment was going to fit together, it allowed me to focus more on what was happening from the operative perspective.” Stakeholders highlighted the importance of positioning “boot camp” at the beginning of residency training, as it directly influenced the point of transition. This highlights the strength of the “boot camp” construct at targeting the challenges associated with discrete moments of transition in the advancement in practice.

While surgical preparatory “boot camps” were initially born out of a competency-based framework focused on technical skill development, our findings demonstrate that the benefits outweigh simple improvement in technical ability. The formation of a learner group identity has downstream effects on resident perceptions of anxiety and confidence, while priming for higher-level learning. “Boot camp” then, is re-imagined as an experience of social professional enculturation.