The British Orthopaedic Association has endorsed a website, . www.orthoconsent.com. , allowing surgeons free access to a bank of pre-written consent forms. These are designed to improve the level of information received by the patient and lessen the risk of successful litigation against surgeons and Health Trusts

Aims. Supracondylar fractures are the most frequently occurring paediatric fractures about the elbow and may be associated with a neurovascular injury. The British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma 11 (BOAST 11) guidelines describe best practice for supracondylar fracture management. This study aimed to assess whether emergency departments in the United Kingdom adhere to BOAST 11 standard 1: a documented assessment, performed on presentation, must include the status of the radial pulse, digital capillary refill time, and the individual function of the radial, median (including the anterior interosseous), and ulnar nerves. . Materials and Methods. Stage 1: We conducted a multicentre, retrospective audit of adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1. Data were collected from eight hospitals in the United Kingdom. A total of 433 children with Gartland type 2 or 3 supracondylar fractures were eligible for inclusion. A centrally created data collection sheet was used to guide objective analysis of whether BOAST 11 standard 1 was adhered to. Stage 2: We created a quality improvement proforma for use in emergency departments. This was piloted in one of the hospitals used in the primary audit and was re-audited using equivalent methodology. In all, 102 patients presenting between January 2016 and July 2017 were eligible for inclusion in the re-audit. Results. Stage 1: Of 433 patient notes audited, adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 was between 201 (46%) and 232 (54%) for the motor and sensory function of the individual nerves specified, 318 (73%) for radial pulse, and 247 (57%) for digital capillary refill time. Stage 2: Of 102 patient notes audited, adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 improved to between 72 (71%) and 80 (78%) for motor and sensory function of the nerves, to 84 (82%) for radial pulse, and to 82 (80%) for digital capillary refill time. Of the 102 case notes reviewed in stage 2, only 44 (43%) used the quality improvement proforma; when the proforma was used, adherence improved to between 40 (91%) and 43 (98%) throughout. Conclusion. Adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 is poor in hospitals across the country. This is concerning as neurovascular deficit may be an indication for emergent surgery, and missed neurovascular injury can cause long-term, or even permanent, functional impairment. We present a simple proforma that improves adherence to this standard, can easily be implemented into emergency departments, and may improve patient safety. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:346–51

Competition ratios for Core Surgical Training (CST) and Higher Specialist Training in Trauma & Orthopaedic (T&O) surgery have decreased over the last 5 years. Whilst multifactorial, one reason thought to contribute to career decision- making, is junior doctors' experience whilst working in that specialty. This study aimed to identify ‘who’ is currently working on the “1st on call” tier in T&O in the UK, and what clinical activities are undertaken.

Collaborators were recruited between 12/09/2015 – 17/01/2016 via the BOTA networks. Data was prospectively collected between 18/01/2015 and 22/01/2015. Each collaborator completed a coded clinical activity diary for all doctors on the “1st on call” rota for T&O in their hospital. Activity parameters included doctor grade, rota gaps, operative and clinic exposure, on call activity, and ward cover.

221 collaborators submitted clinical activity data regarding 933 junior doctors from 100 T&O departments in the UK. 30 rota gaps were identified. The mean number of junior tier doctors was 9 (range 1–23). The “Lost Tribe” comprised Foundation Year 2 (26%), Core Surgical Trainee (19%), Trust Grade (20%), and locum doctors (13%), amongst other grades. During the study period, 2.5% of the ‘Lost Tribe’s' time was allocated to clinic, 2.7% to theatre, 27% to ward cover and 34.6% to zero sessions.

Doctors-in-training make up a minority of the workforce and as such, the T&O profession need to do more to ensure that junior doctors are exposed to clinics and operative lists to specifically address the balance between training and service delivery.

Aims. Most patients with advanced malignancy suffer bone metastases, which pose a significant challenge to orthopaedic services and burden to the health economy. This study aimed to assess adherence to the British Orthopaedic Oncology Society (BOOS)/British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) guidelines on patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) in the UK. Methods. A prospective, multicentre, national collaborative audit was designed and delivered by a trainee-led collaborative group. Data were collected over three months (1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021) for all patients presenting with MBD. A data collection tool allowed investigators at each hospital to compare practice against guidelines. Data were collated and analyzed centrally to quantify compliance from 84 hospitals in the UK for a total of 1,137 patients who were eligible for inclusion. Results. A total of 846 patients with pelvic and appendicular MBD were analyzed, after excluding those with only spinal metastatic disease. A designated MBD lead was not present in 39% of centres (33/84). Adequate radiographs were not performed in 19% of patients (160/846), and 29% (247/846) did not have an up-to-date CT of thorax, abdomen, and pelvis to stage their disease. Compliance was low obtaining an oncological opinion (69%; 584/846) and prognosis estimations (38%; 223/846). Surgery was performed in 38% of patients (319/846), with the rates of up-to-date radiological investigations and oncology input with prognosis below the expected standard. Of the 25% (215/846) presenting with a solitary metastasis, a tertiary opinion from a MBD centre and biopsy was sought in 60% (130/215). Conclusion. Current practice in the UK does not comply with national guidelines, especially regarding investigations prior to surgery and for patients with solitary metastases. This study highlights the need for investment and improvement in care. The recent publication of British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST) defines auditable standards to drive these improvements for this vulnerable patient group. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(10):1115–1122

Aims. This study estimated trends in incidence of open fractures and the adherence to clinical standards for open fracture care in England. Methods. Longitudinal data collected by the Trauma Audit and Research Network were used to identify 38,347 patients with open fractures, and a subgroup of 12,170 with severe open fractures of the tibia, between 2008 and 2019 in England. Incidence rates per 100,000 person-years and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Clinical care was compared with the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and National Major Trauma Centre audit standards. Results. In total, 60% of all open fractures occurred in males; the median age was 48 years (interquartile range (IQR) 29 to 68). Between 2012 and 2019, the overall incidence in England was 6.94 per 100,000 person-years. In males, the highest incidence observed was in those aged 20 to 29 years (11.50 per 100,000 person-years); in females, incidence increased with age, peaking at 32.11/100,000 person-years at 90 years of age and over. Among those with severe open fractures of the tibia, there was a bimodal distribution in males, peaking at 20 to 29 years (3.71/100,000 person-years) and greater than 90 years of age (2.84/100,000 person-years) respectively; among females, incidence increased with age to a peak of 9.91/100,000 person years at 90 years of age and over. There has been variable improvement with time in the clinical care standards for patients with severe open fractures of the tibia. The median time to debridement was 13.0 hours (IQR 6.4 to 20.9); almost two-thirds of patients underwent definitive soft-tissue coverage within 72 hours from 2016 to 2019. Conclusion. This is the first time the incidence of all open fractures has been studied using data from a national audit in England. While most open fractures occurred in young males, the incidence increased with age in females to a much greater level than observed in older males. The degree of missing data in the national audit is startling, and limits the certainty of inferences drawn concerning open fracture care. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):736–746

Aims. The purpose of this study was to determine the weightbearing practice of operatively managed fragility fractures in the setting of publically funded health services in the UK and Ireland. Methods. The Fragility Fracture Postoperative Mobilisation (FFPOM) multicentre audit included all patients aged 60 years and older undergoing surgery for a fragility fracture of the lower limb between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2019, and 1 February 2021 and 14 March 2021. Fractures arising from high-energy transfer trauma, patients with multiple injuries, and those associated with metastatic deposits or infection were excluded. We analyzed this patient cohort to determine adherence to the British Orthopaedic Association Standard, “all surgery in the frail patient should be performed to allow full weight-bearing for activities required for daily living”. Results. A total of 19,557 patients (mean age 82 years (SD 9), 16,241 having a hip fracture) were included. Overall, 16,614 patients (85.0%) were instructed to perform weightbearing where required for daily living immediately postoperatively (15,543 (95.7%) hip fracture and 1,071 (32.3%) non-hip fracture patients). The median length of stay was 12.2 days (interquartile range (IQR) 7.9 to 20.0) (12.6 days (IQR 8.2 to 20.4) for hip fracture and 10.3 days (IQR 5.5 to 18.7) for non-hip fracture patients). Conclusion. Non-hip fracture patients experienced more postoperative weightbearing restrictions, although they had a shorter hospital stay. Patients sustaining fractures of the shaft and distal femur had a longer median length of stay than demographically similar patients who received hip fracture surgery. We have shown a significant disparity in weightbearing restrictions placed on patients with fragility fractures, despite the publication of a national guideline. Surgeons intentionally restrict postoperative weightbearing in the majority of non-hip fractures, yet are content with unrestricted weightbearing following operations for hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):972–979

Aims. Ankle fractures are common injuries and the third most common fragility fracture. In all, 40% of ankle fractures in the frail are open and represent a complex clinical scenario, with morbidity and mortality rates similar to hip fracture patients. They have a higher risk of complications, such as wound infections, malunion, hospital-acquired infections, pressure sores, veno-thromboembolic events, and significant sarcopaenia from prolonged bed rest. Methods. A modified Delphi method was used and a group of experts with a vested interest in best practice were invited from the British Foot and Ankle Society (BOFAS), British Orthopaedic Association (BOA), Orthopaedic Trauma Society (OTS), British Association of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgeons (BAPRAS), British Geriatric Society (BGS), and the British Limb Reconstruction Society (BLRS). Results. In the first stage, there were 36 respondents to the survey, with over 70% stating their unit treats more than 20 such cases per year. There was a 50:50 split regarding if the timing of surgery should be within 36 hours, as per the hip fracture guidelines, or 72 hours, as per the open fracture guidelines. Overall, 75% would attempt primary wound closure and 25% would utilize a local flap. There was no orthopaedic agreement on fixation, and 75% would permit weightbearing immediately. In the second stage, performed at the BLRS meeting, experts discussed the survey results and agreed upon a consensus for the management of open elderly ankle fractures. Conclusion. A mutually agreed consensus from the expert panel was reached to enable the best practice for the management of patients with frailty with an open ankle fracture: 1) all units managing lower limb fragility fractures should do so through a cohorted multidisciplinary pathway. This pathway should follow the standards laid down in the "care of the older or frail orthopaedic trauma patient" British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guideline. These patients have low bone density, and we should recommend full falls and bone health assessment; 2) all open lower limb fragility fractures should be treated in a single stage within 24 hours of injury if possible; 3) all patients with fragility fractures of the lower limb should be considered for mobilisation on the day following surgery; 4) all patients with lower limb open fragility fractures should be considered for tissue sparing, with judicious debridement as a default; 5) all patients with open lower limb fragility fractures should be managed by a consultant plastic surgeon with primary closure wherever possible; and 6) the method of fixation must allow for immediate unrestricted weightbearing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):236–242

Aims. The Open-Fracture Patient Evaluation Nationwide (OPEN) study was performed to provide clarity in open fracture management previously skewed by small, specialist centre studies and large, unfocused registry investigations. We report the current management metrics of open fractures across the UK. Method. Patients admitted to hospital with an open fracture (excluding phalanges or isolated hand injuries) between 1 June 2021 and 30 September 2021 were included. Institutional information governance approval was obtained at the lead site and all data entered using Research Electronic Data Capture software. All domains of the British Orthopaedic Association Standard for Open Fracture Management were recorded. Results. Across 51 centres, 1,175 patients were analyzed. Antibiotics were given to 754 (69.0%) in the emergency department, 240 (22.0%) pre-hospital, and 99 (9.1%) as inpatients. Wounds were photographed in 848 (72.7%) cases. Median time to first surgery was 16 hrs 14 mins (interquartile range (IQR) 8 hrs 29 mins to 23 hrs 19 mins). Complex injuries were operated on sooner (median 12 hrs 51 mins (IQR 4 hrs 36 mins to 21 hrs 14 mins)). Of initial procedures, 1,053 (90.3%) occurred between 8am and 8pm. A consultant orthopaedic surgeon was present at 1,039 (89.2%) first procedures. In orthoplastic centres, a consultant plastic surgeon was present at 465 (45.1%) first procedures. Overall, 706 (60.8%) patients required a single operation. At primary debridement, 798 (65.0%) fractures were definitively fixed, while 734 (59.8%) fractures had fixation and coverage in one operation through direct closure or soft-tissue coverage. Negative pressure wound therapy was used in 235 (67.7%) staged procedures. Following wound closure or soft-tissue cover, 509 (47.0%) patients received antibiotics for a median of three days (IQR 1 to 7). Conclusion. OPEN provides an insight into care across the UK and different levels of hospital for open fractures. Patients are predominantly operated on promptly, in working hours, and at specialist centres. Areas for improvement include combined patient review and follow-up, scheduled operating, earlier definitive soft-tissue cover, and more robust antibiotic husbandry. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(9):1073–1080

Aims

This is a multicentre, prospective assessment of a proportion of the overall orthopaedic trauma caseload of the UK. It investigates theatre capacity, cancellations, and time to surgery in a group of hospitals that is representative of the wider population. It identifies barriers to effective practice and will inform system improvements.

Aims. Virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) are advocated by recent British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOASTs) to efficiently manage injuries during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary aim of this national study is to assess the impact of these standards on patient satisfaction and clinical outcome amid the pandemic. The secondary aims are to determine the impact of the pandemic on the demographic details of injuries presenting to the VFC, and to compare outcomes and satisfaction when the BOAST guidelines were first introduced with a subsequent period when local practice would be familiar with these guidelines. Methods. This is a national cross-sectional cohort study comprising centres with VFC services across the UK. All consecutive adult patients assessed in VFC in a two-week period pre-lockdown (6 May 2019 to 19 May 2019) and in the same two-week period at the peak of the first lockdown (4 May 2020 to 17 May 2020), and a randomly selected sample during the ‘second wave’ (October 2020) will be eligible for the study. Data comprising local VFC practice, patient and injury characteristics, unplanned re-attendances, and complications will be collected by local investigators for all time periods. A telephone questionnaire will be used to determine patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcomes for patients who were discharged following VFC assessment without face-to-face consultation. Ethics and dissemination. The study results will identify changes in case-mix and numbers of patients managed through VFCs and whether this is safe and associated with patient satisfaction. These data will provide key information for future expert-led consensus on management of trauma injuries through the VFC. The protocol will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed publication. This protocol has been reviewed by the South East Scotland Research Ethics Service and is classified as a multicentre audit. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(3):211–215

Introduction. The aim of this study is to report the 30 day COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality of patients assessed as SARS-CoV-2 negative who underwent emergency or urgent orthopaedic surgery in the NHS during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Method. A retrospective, single centre, observational cohort study of all patients undergoing surgery between 17 March 2020 and 3May 2020 was performed. Outcomes were stratified by British Orthopaedic Association COVID-19 Patient Risk Assessment Tool. Patients who were SARS-CoV-2 positive at the time of surgery were excluded. Results. Overall, 96 patients assessed as negative for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of surgery underwent 100 emergency or urgent orthopaedic procedures during the study period. Within 30 days of surgery 9.4% of patients (n = 9) were found to be SARS-CoV-2 positive by nasopharyngeal swab. The overall 30 day mortality rate across the whole cohort of patients during this period was 3% (n = 3). Of those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 66% (n = 6) developed significant COVID-19 related complications and there was a 33% 30-day mortality rate (n = 3). Overall, the 30-day mortality in patients classified as BOA low or medium risk (n = 69) was 0%, whereas in those classified as high or very high risk (n = 27) it was 11.1%. Conclusion. Orthopaedic surgery in SARS-CoV-2 negative patients who transition to positive within 30 days of surgery carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. In lower risk groups, the overall risk of becoming SARS-CoV-2 positive, and subsequently developing a significant postoperative related complication, was low even during the peak of the pandemic. In addition to ensuring patients are SARS-CoV-2 negative at the time of surgery it is important that the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 is minimized through their recovery. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:474–480

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(4):256–258.

Aims. Displaced distal radius fractures were investigated at a level 1 major trauma centre during the COVID-19 2020 lockdown due to the implementation of temporary changes in practice. The primary aim was to establish if follow-up at one week in place of the 72-hour British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma & Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidance was safe following manipulation under anaesthetic. A parallel adaptation during lockdown was the non-expectation of Bier’s block. The secondary aim was to compare clinical outcomes with respect to block type. Methods. Overall, 90 patients were assessed in a cross-sectional cohort study using a mixed, retrospective-prospective approach. Consecutive sampling of 30 patients pre-lockdown (P1), 30 during lockdown (P2), and 30 during post-lockdown (P3) was applied. Type of block, operative status, follow-up, and complications were extracted. Primary endpoints were early complications (≤ one week). Secondary endpoints were later complications including malunion, delayed union or osteotomy. Results. In P1, 86.6% of patients were seen between days one to three, 26.7% in P2, and 56.7% in P3. There were no documented complications from days one to three. Operative rate was 35.5%, which did not vary significantly (p= 0.712). Primary endpoints occurred between day four to seven, and included one patient each period treated for plaster cast pain. Secondary endpoints in P1 included delayed union (one patient). During P2, this included malunion (one patient), a pressure sore (one patient) and ulnar cutaneous nerve symptoms (two patients). In P3, malunion was identified in one patient. Mean follow-up was six months (4 to 9) with union rate 96%. Change in block practice varied significantly (p =＜0.05). The risk ratio of complications using regional block (Bier’s) over haematoma block was 0.65. Conclusion. Follow-up adaptations during lockdown did not adversely affect patient outcomes. Regional anaesthesia is gold standard for manipulation of displaced distal radial fractures. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):338–343

Aims

The number of females within the speciality of trauma and orthopaedics (T&O) is increasing. The aim of this study was to identify: 1) current attitudes and behaviours of UK female T&O surgeons towards pregnancy; 2) any barriers faced towards pregnancy with a career in T&O surgery; and 3) areas for improvement.

One of the ethical and legal requirements of valid consent for treatment is that patients must be fully informed about the complications involved. The General Medical Council (UK) insists that all adverse outcomes of a treatment, which are serious or frequently occurring, must be discussed with the patient. Previous studies have found a large variance in the risks documented on consent forms for orthopaedic hip operations. The aim of this study was to compare the risks documented for three orthopaedic hip operations against pre-constructed operation-specific consent forms endorsed by the British Orthopaedic Association. We retrospectively analysed 300 consent forms for total hip replacements, hip hemiarthoplasties and dynamic hip screw operations (n=100 for each) and noted the risks documented, whether the form was completely legible, the grade of the Doctor obtaining consent and whether a copy of the consent form was given to the patient. We found that of the 300 operations, only 43.1% of the complications were documented as recommended by the British Orthopaedic Association. Furthermore, 26.3 % of consent forms were illegible, 72.7% of patients were consented by the Senior House Officer and only 13.7% of patients were offered a copy of the consent form. Our results indicate that the Methods: of obtaining consent and filling in the consent forms for orthopaedic hip operations could be vastly improved. One method which could be utilized to achieve this would be the incorporation of procedure specific templates in the consenting process. These templates are already in the public domain and free to use at . www.orthoconsent.com. This would allow the patient to weigh up the risks and make a valid informed decision about their treatment and also protect the Doctors from any possible litigation

Purpose of the study: Our aim was to look at, how we are following the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) guidelines regarding the clinic times. The decrease in doctor working hours and increase in sub-specialisation has added to the problem. Methods: 55 Orthopaedic clinics were observed and time mapped to the nearest second by an independent observer. 5 clinics observed for each of 11 clinicians (5 Consultants and 6 Registrars). The patient factors viz age, sex, mobility, BMI, site of disease were recorded. The clinician factors viz. seniority, sub-specialisation were also recorded. Results: Of total Clinic time, 45% spent for consulting follow-up cases, 26% for new cases and 29% lost in in-between patient transit time. Of the total clinic time, patient time was 75%, procedures 4%, investigations 3%, consent 4%, dictation 13%, teaching 1%. Mean time for consultation was 13 minutes 6 seconds for new and 8 minutes 43 seconds for follow up patients which was significantly less than that recommended by BOA guidelines (15 – 20 minutes for new and 10 –15 minutes for follow up patients). Conclusion: Since the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) guidelines in 1990, there has been a change in patient’s expectation, responsibility of the clinician towards well informed patients, detailed investigation, consenting in clinics etc. Despite the clinics over running in time the BOA guidelines are not being adhered to potentially compromising quality consultation and training at the cost of pressures to see the recommended 22 unit patients per clinic. There is a need to revise BOA guidelines regarding clinics to provide more time in clinics per patient to maintain quality of care and training

Aims

The aims of this study were to describe the demographic, socioeconomic, and educational factors associated with core surgical trainees (CSTs) who apply to and receive offers for higher surgical training (ST3) posts in Trauma & Orthopaedics (T&O).

Aims

Global literature suggests that female surgical trainees have lower rates of independent operating (operative autonomy) than their male counterparts. The objective of this study was to identify any association between gender and lead/independent operating in speciality orthopaedic trainees within the UK national training programme.

Introduction. Despite the established guidelines on lower extremity free flap reconstruction by the British Orthopaedic Association Standard for Trauma (BOAST-4) the post-operative care has yet to be standardised. There is currently no coherent evidence in the literature regarding clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression; the optimal regimes and their respective physiological benefits. The aim of this study is to survey all UK Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) with regards to the post-operative care of lower extremity free flaps and elucidate the current protocols for clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. Materials & Methods. All UK-based adult MTCs were surveyed. We formulated a detailed questionnaire to enquire about the post-operative care of lower extremity free flap reconstructions; the number of free flap reconstructions per month and take backs per month and for which post-operative methods a protocol is used in each MTC. We asked specific questions concerning: clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. This questionnaire was distributed to consultant leads in the form of multiple choice questions, with an option of free-text box for further comments, using JISC online surveys. Results were analysed in Excel and presented in percentages. Results. The 28 adult MTCs were contacted. The results showed a lack of formal regional protocols with great variability, suggesting there is no general consensus on post-operative care of lower extremity free flap reconstructions with regards to clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. Conclusions. This survey of UK MTCs on the post-operative protocols for lower extremity free flap reconstruction demonstrated lack of evidence, consensus and large variability in common practice which requires standardisation

Aims. To assess the proportion of patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs) who were managed nonoperatively during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with the British Orthopaedic Association BOAST COVID-19 guidelines, who would have otherwise been considered for an operative intervention. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the radiographs and clinical notes of all patients with DRFs managed nonoperatively, following the publication of the BOAST COVID-19 guidelines on the management of urgent trauma between 26 March and 18 May 2020. Radiological parameters including radial height, radial inclination, intra-articular step-off, and volar tilt from post-reduction or post-application of cast radiographs were measured. The assumption was that if one radiological parameter exceeds the acceptable criteria, the patient would have been considered for an operative intervention in pre-COVID times. Results. Overall, 92 patients formed the cohort of this study with a mean age of 66 years (21 to 96); 84% (n = 77) were female and 16% (n = 15) were male. In total, 54% (n = 50) of patients met at least one radiological indication for operative intervention with a mean age of 68 years (21 to 96). Of these, 42% (n = 21) were aged < 65 years and 58% (29) were aged ≥ 65 years. Conclusion. More than half of all DRFs managed nonoperatively during the COVID-19 pandemic had at least one radiological indication to be considered for operative management pre-COVID. We anticipate a proportion of these cases will require corrective surgery in the future, which increases the load on corrective upper limb elective services. This should be accounted for when planning an exit strategy and the restart of elective surgery services. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-10:612–616

Abstract. Objective. Open fracture management in the United Kingdom and several other countries is guided by the British Orthopaedic Association's Standards for Trauma Number 4 (BOAST-4). This is updated periodically and is based on the best available evidence at the time. The aim of this study is to evaluate the evidence base forming this guidance and to highlight new developments since the last version in 2017. Methods. Searches have been performed using the PubMed, Embase and Medline databases for time periods a) before December 31, 2017 and from 01/01/2018–01/02/2021. Results have been summarised and discussed. Results. Several contentious issues remain within the 2017 guideline. Antibiotic guidance, the use of antibiotic impregnated PMMA beads and intramedullary devices, irrigation in the emergency department, time to theatre and the use of negative pressure dressings and guidance regarding the management of paediatric injuries have all demonstrated no clear consensus. Conclusion. The advent of the BOAST-4 guideline has been of huge benefit, however the refinement and improvement of this work remains ongoing. There remains a need for further study into these contentious issues previously listed