Aims: To validate the use Ottawa Ankles Rules (OAR) protocol in the accidents department, to evaluate its sensitivity in excluding a fracture and to examine the practical benefits. Methods: From August 2000 to January 2001 we examined 124 patients with foot and ankle injuries in the A& E department by three of our junior doctors. They were judged according to OAR protocol which requests an x-ray according to certain criteria. We have estimated the time spent in A& E. 72 of them were in accordance of the OAR protocol and they had typical x-ray examination & subsequent treatment. Results: The remaining 52 (41.9%) patients consist the target population. They were reexamined in 48–72 h, in one week and in one month and there was no need for an x-ray to any of them. None of them had a second opinion & they followed the given orders. The target group stayed for an average of 8.8 min (SD=4.4), while the other group for 24.6 min (SD=10.8), which was statistical significant (p< 0.001). From the above is obvious a 100% sensitivity of the method & so decrease in the amount of x-rays by 41.9%.

Conclusions: It is apparent that this protocol can be safely introduced in the A& E department. It has to be used by orthopaedic surgeons (trainees) with appropriate behavior & respect to the patient. It can diminish the number of x-rays, the amount of radiation, the cost and the waiting time in the A& E department.

The purpose of this study was to present long-term results of elbow dislocation in children. Eleven patients (10 male) with elbow dislocation (mean age 10.4 years old) were re-evaluated with mean follow up 85 months (24 – 186). Active range of motion and instability were clinically evaluated. Osteoarthritic changes, position and shape of medial epicondyle were radiographically recorded. Functional evaluation was made with Hospital for Special Surgery Elbow Assessment protocol (up to 100).

All cases were treated with closed reduction under general anaesthesia. Three patients were treated surgically with KW for fractures of medial epicondyle. Lack of extension (5° – 15°) was detected in 3 patients two of which had fractures (1 osteochondral and 1 of medial epicondyle). 4 patients were presented with flexion deficit (5° – 10°) while 1 patient had reduction both for supination and pronation (fx of medial epicondyle). Decreased pronation was recorded in two more patients (5° — 10°). Radiologically we found a patient with medial and lateral epicondyle alteration, a patient with osteochondral fracture and another one with ossification of LCL. Functionally the overall result was excellent (subjectively) while mean HSS Elbow Assessment score was 99.1 (96–100).