Restarting planned surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is a clinical and societal priority, but it is unknown whether it can be done safely and include high-risk or complex cases. We developed a Surgical Prioritization and Allocation Guide (SPAG). Here, we validate its effectiveness and safety in COVID-free sites. A multidisciplinary surgical prioritization committee developed the SPAG, incorporating procedural urgency, shared decision-making, patient safety, and biopsychosocial factors; and applied it to 1,142 adult patients awaiting orthopaedic surgery. Patients were stratified into four priority groups and underwent surgery at three COVID-free sites, including one with access to a high dependency unit (HDU) or intensive care unit (ICU) and specialist resources. Safety was assessed by the number of patients requiring inpatient postoperative HDU/ICU admission, contracting COVID-19 within 14 days postoperatively, and mortality within 30 days postoperatively.Aims
Methods
In the United Kingdom, over 1 million elective surgeries were cancelled due to COVID-19, resulting in over 1.9 million people now waiting more than 4 months for their procedure – 3x the number last year. To address this backlog, the healthcare service has been asked to develop locally-designed ‘COVID-light’ facilities. In our local system, 822 patients awaited orthopaedic surgery when elective surgery was permitted to resume. The phased return of service required a careful and pragmatic prioritisation of patients, to protect resources, patients, and healthcare workers. We aim to describe how the COVID-19 Algorithm for Resuming Elective Surgery (CARES) was used to consider 1) Which type of operation and patient should be prioritised? and 2) Which patients are safe to undergo surgery? The central tenets to this were patient safety, predicted efficacy of the surgery, and delivering compassionate care by considering biopsychosocial factors.Background
Aims
For hallux valgus correction, distal first metatarsal osteotomy is generally used for minor to moderate deformities, diaphyseal osteotomy for moderate deformities and basal osteotomy or fusion for severe deformities. With the advent of locking plates, there has been renewed interest in opening wedge basal osteotomy. As little has been written about its geometry, we undertook this study in order to understand its power and limitations. Proximal opening wedge osteotomies were performed on saw bone models in four orientations, with three different wedge sizes: 1. Perpendicular to the ground (PG); 2. Perpendicular to the shaft (PS); 3. Perpendicular to shaft with 30° declination (DEC); 4. 30° oblique (OB). Pre- and post-osteotomy measurements were made of axial and plantar translation and intermetatarsal angle. Plantar translation and intermetatarsal angle correction increased with increasing wedge size. The DEC osteotomy produced the greatest increase in length of metatarsal shaft, while the PS osteotomy gave the least. The most plantar translation was achieved with the DEC osteotomy. Overall, the PS osteotomy gave the largest correction of the intermetatarsal angle. Although there are several published clinical case series of the proximal opening wedge osteotomy, this is the first study to fully evaluate its geometry.
