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. 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

Aims. The primary aim of the survey was to map the current provision of simulation training within UK and Republic of Ireland (RoI) trauma and orthopaedic (T&O) specialist training programmes to inform future design of a simulation based-curriculum. The secondary aims were to characterize; the types of simulation offered to trainees by stage of training, the sources of funding for simulation, the barriers to providing simulation in training, and to measure current research activity assessing the educational impact of simulation. Methods. The development of the survey was a collaborative effort between the authors and the British Orthopaedic Association Simulation Group. The survey items were embedded in the Performance and Opportunity Dashboard, which annually audits quality in training across several domains on behalf of the Speciality Advisory Committee (SAC). The survey was sent via email to the 30 training programme directors in March 2019. Data were retrieved and analyzed at the Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, UK. Results. Overall, 28 of 30 programme directors completed the survey (93%). 82% of programmes had access to high-fidelity simulation facilities such as cadaveric laboratories. More than half (54%) had access to a non-technical skills simulation training. Less than half (43%) received centralized funding for simulation, a third relied on local funding such as the departmental budget, and there was a heavy reliance on industry sponsorship to partly or wholly fund simulation training (64%). Provision was higher in the mid-stages (ST3-5) compared to late-stages (ST6-8) of training, and was formally timetabled in 68% of prostgrammes. There was no assessment of the impact of simulation training using objective behavioural measures or real-world clinical outcomes. Conclusion. There is currently widespread, but variable, provision of simulation in T&O training in the UK and RoI, which is likely to expand further with the new curriculum. It is important that research activity into the impact of simulation training continues, to develop an evidence base to support investment in facilities and provision

Accurate documentation of operative findings is a fundamentally important part of any procedure and forms part of the Royal College of Surgeons of England's guidelines to good care, especially to “ensure that there are legible operative notes (typed if possible) for every operative procedure.” However, many hospitals fall short of this guideline when it comes to arthroscopic procedures because of the difficulty in reproducing visually representative and easy-to-understand images. There is an inability to properly record and archive findings of arthroscopic procedures. We, along with the British Orthopaedic Association, have developed an interactive, free Web-based operative note template that allows the surgeon to draw findings on diagrams of the joints commonly undergoing arthroscopy, type the findings, and then print as many copies as required. The use of the forms has allowed for quicker, easier, and more accurate documentation of arthroscopic procedures. The forms can then be saved to a database and used as a research tool

Introduction. The rising incidence of metastatic bone disease (MBD) in the UK poses a significant management problem. Poorly defined levels of service provision have meant that improvements in patient prognosis have been mediocre at best. For that reason the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) in conjunction with the British Orthopaedic Oncology Society (BOOS) issued guidelines in 2002 on good practice in the management of MBD. Despite the availability of these standards, there is very little robust data available for audit. The aim of this study was to conduct a regional survey of how these guidelines are being used in the management of MBD. Methods. A questionnaire was designed with 9 multiple choice questions representing the most common MBD scenarios. This was posted to 106 Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeons in 12 NHS Trusts in the South East of England. Results. The overall response rate to the questionnaire was 44%. There was considerable variation in the management of solitary femoral diaphyseal lesions, pathological subtrochanteric and intertrochanteric femoral neck fractures and vertebral metastases. Furthermore only 2 out of the 12 Trusts surveyed had a designated MBD lead as per the BOA/BOOS guidelines. Discussion. Our study reflects the variation in the management of MBD throughout the region, which may in turn be linked to poorer clinical outcomes. The results demonstrate the possibility of (i) inappropriate initial treatment, (ii) subsequent late tertiary referral and (iii) poor understanding of the biomechanical basis of orthopaedic implants, with the potential for inappropriate choice of prostheses and high failure rates. Streamlining cancer care will involve establishing regional MBD units within large centres where multidisciplinary services are available. Consequently all surrounding hospitals will need a designated MBD lead that can function as a conduit to this integrated care for selected patients

British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) Guidelines recommend clinical and radiological follow-up after Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) at 1 year, 5 years and every 5 years thereafter to detect asymptomatic failure. To evaluate the importance of routine follow-up appointments (OPAs) in detecting failing implants the presentation of patients undergoing revision THA was reviewed. 176 patients who received 183 first-time revision THAs over a seven-year period (2003-2010) were identified from an arthroplasty database. A preliminary study sampled 46 THAs in 45 patients. Retrospective chart review recorded symptoms and mode of presentation. Follow-up OPA costs were calculated to estimate savings. All patients had symptoms at the time of revision (pain 96%, decreased mobility 76%, limp 35%, stiffness 26%, night pain 24%). Route of presentation was 80% new referrals (GP 63%, in-patient 9%, A&E 4%, Rheumatology 4%) vs 20% routine orthopaedic follow-up. The minimum cost for a routine follow-up OPA was £35. Assuming discharge after the earliest review when the patient has returned to full normal activities the estimated saving for the 2009 cohort of 377 primary THAs performed in our hospital is £13195 at 1 year and £52780 over the lifespan of the implants (assuming average 15 year survival). Following uncomplicated primary cemented THA in our hospital asymptomatic implant failure is unlikely. Symptomatic patients tend to present mainly to their GP and other specialities, rather than orthopaedic follow-up OPAs. Early discharge after return to full normal activities would be safe and lead to significant financial savings

Introduction. We compared standard NexGen Cruciate substituting-flex prosthesis with gender-specific NexGen Cruciate substituting flex prosthesis in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty with regard to Coverage of the bone by femoral component, Clinical outcome, Radiographic outcome, Survival and complication rates, with special emphasis on patellofemoral complications. Material & Methods. 30 female patients with osteo-arthritis of the knees with similar deformity and preoperative range of motion were randomized to have one knee replaced with a gender non-specific Nexgen Cruciate substituting (Zimmer) prosthesis and the other with Gender Cruciate substituting (Zimmer) prosthesis. Follow-up clinical evaluation was done at 6, and 12 months postoperatively and then at yearly interval using “Knee Society” Recommendations. Clinical assessment of the patellofemoral joint of the replaced knees was done with the help of “Hospital for Special Surgery” patellar scoring system. The overall patient satisfaction after surgery was evaluated with use of the British Orthopaedic Association patient satisfaction score. Results. The mean age was 63.8 years (range 49–76 years). 14 patients had standard NexGen Cruciate substituting-flex gender knee prosthesis on right side and 16 patients had on left side. On the other sides, standard NexGen Cruciate substituting-flex prosthesis implant was used. Preop Clinical findings were similar in both groups. The average Preop range of motion was identical in both the groups. The average follow up was 2.5 years (2–3.8 years). The mean post-operative Knee Society knee scores were 88,90,94, (70 to 100) and 87,92, 93 (70 to 100) points and the function scores were 83,85,88 (60 to 100) and 84.86.88 (60 to 100) points for the standard implants and the gender-specific designs, respectively at 6 months, 1 year and 2 year follow up. Mean improvement in patella score was 65, 71.1 and 73.3 points in Gender group at the end of 6 month, 1 yr and 2 yr respectively as compared to 65.6, 71.1 and 72.2 in Nexgen group. No patient had malpositioning of components or radiolucencies at the end of 2 year follow up. Mean improvement in BOA functional score was 20.6, 22.6 and 24.1 points in Gender group at the end of 6 months, 1 year and 2 year respectively as compared to 20.7, 21.8 and 23.2 in Nexgen group. In those with a standard prosthesis, the femoral component was closely matched in 30 knees, overhung in 17 and undercovered the bone in 13. In those with a gender-specific prosthesis, it was closely matched in 45 knees and undercovered the bone in 15. Conclusion. Although gender specific knee matched the femoral anatomy of Indian female knees better than the standard nexgen Knee, we found no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the clinical and radiological results, patient satisfaction or complication rate

Aims

Understanding of open fracture management is skewed due to reliance on small-number lower limb, specialist unit reports and large, unfocused registry data collections. To address this, we carried out the Open Fracture Patient Evaluation Nationwide (OPEN) study, and report the demographic details and the initial steps of care for patients admitted with open fractures in the UK.

Aims

Several studies have reported that patients presenting during the evening or weekend have poorer quality healthcare. Our objective was to examine how timely surgery for patients with severe open tibial fracture varies by day and time of presentation and by type of hospital. This cohort study included patients with severe open tibial fractures from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN).

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the Orthopaedic Trauma Society (OTS) classification of open fractures and economic costs.

Aims

It is imperative to understand the risks of operating on urgent cases during the COVID-19 (SARS-Cov-2 virus) pandemic for clinical decision-making and medical resource planning. The primary aim was to determine the mortality risk and associated variables when operating on urgent cases during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary objective was to assess differences in the outcome of patients treated between sites treating COVID-19 and a separate surgical site.

Aims

COVID-19 necessitated abrupt changes in trauma service delivery. We compare the demographics and outcomes of patients treated during lockdown to a matched period from 2019. Findings have important implications for service development.

Aims

The aim of this study was to examine trends in the management of fractures of the distal radius in Ireland over a ten-year period, and to determine if there were any changes in response to the English Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (DRAFFT).

Aims

Type IIIB open tibial fractures are devastating high-energy injuries. At initial debridement, the surgeon will often be faced with large bone fragments with tenuous, if any, soft-tissue attachments. Conventionally these are discarded to avoid infection. We aimed to determine if orthoplastic reconstruction using mechanically relevant devitalized bone (ORDB) was associated with an increased infection rate in type IIIB open tibial shaft fractures.

Aims

The management of open lower limb fractures in the United Kingdom has evolved over the last ten years with the introduction of major trauma networks (MTNs), the publication of standards of care and the wide acceptance of a combined orthopaedic and plastic surgical approach to management. The aims of this study were to report recent changes in outcome of open tibial fractures following the implementation of these changes.