Introduction. Virtual fracture clinics (VFC's) aim to reduce the number of outpatient appointments while improving the clinical effectiveness and patients experience through standardisation of treatment pathways. With 4.6% of ED admissions due to trauma the VFC prevents unnecessary face to face appointments providing a cost savings benefit to the NHS. Methods. This project demonstrates the importance of efficient VFC process in reducing the burden on the fracture clinics. We completed preformed a retrospective cross-sectional study, analysing two cycles in May (n=305) and September (n=332) 2021. We reviewed all VFC referrals during this time assessing the quality of the referral, if they went on to require a face to face follow up and who the referring health care professional was. Following the cycle in May we provided ongoing education to A&E staff before re-auditing in September. Results. Between the two cycles there was an average 19% improvement in quality of the referrals, significant reduction in number of inappropriate referrals for soft tissue knee and shoulder injuries from 15.1% (n=50) to 4.5% (n=15) following our intervention. There was an 8% increase in number of fracture clinic appointments to 74.4% (n=247), primarily due to an increase number of referrals from nurse practitioners. Radial head fractures were targeted as one group that were able to be successfully managed in VFC, despite this 64% (n=27) of patients were still seen in the outpatient department following VFC referral. Conclusion. Despite the decrease in the number of inappropriate referrals, and the increase in quality of referrals following our intervention. The percentage of VFC referrals in CAVUHB is still higher than other centres in with established VFCs in England. This possibly highlights the need for further education to emergency staff around describing what injuries are appropriate for referral, specifically soft tissue injuries and radial head fractures. In order to optimise the VFC process and provide further cost savings benefits while reducing the strain on fracture clinics

Background. Both surgeon and hospital volume influence patient outcomes following revision knee arthroplasty. Purpose. To audit all centres performing revision knee procedures in England and Wales over a 2-year period. All centres were audited against two pre-defined standards linked to hospital volume. Operative volume should be greater than 10 revisions per year;. More than 2.5 revisions should be performed for every 100 primary arthroplasties implanted. Methods. Data for 9659 knee revisions performed in 359 different centres between 01/07/08 and 30/06/10 was accessed from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. For each centre information on the volume of primary and revision knee procedures undertaken during this period was available and was used as the basis for audit. Results. During the 2-year study period 396 different centres performed 153133 primary knee arthroplasties. Of these 359 (91%) performed 9659 knee revisions, equivalent to 6.2 revisions for every 100 primary arthroplasties performed. Revision centres included 208 (58%) NHS hospitals performing 8148 revisions, 141 (39%) independent hospitals performing 1258 revisions and 10 (3%) Independent Sector Treatment Centres (ISTC) performing 253 revisions. The median number of revisions performed per hospital was 7 per year (Range 1 to 144). Volume differed dependent upon hospital type (NHS=14/year vs. Independent=3/year, p< 0.001). Two hundred and twelve (59%) centres performed < 10 revisions per year and thus fell below the audit standard. Eighty of these centres also performed < 2.5 revisions per 100 primaries. Of the 141 independent hospitals 128 (91%) fell below the suggested standards for revision volume. Conclusions. A significant number of institutions are performing only a small volume of knee revision procedures. To ensure safe and sustainable practice with better outcomes, consideration should be given to rationalising the revision service in fewer centres

Aims. The primary aim is to estimate the current and potential number of patients on NHS England orthopaedic elective waiting lists by November 2020. The secondary aims are to model recovery strategies; review the deficit of hip and knee arthroplasty from National Joint Registry (NJR) data; and assess the cost of returning to pre-COVID-19 waiting list numbers. Methods. A model of referral, waiting list, and eventual surgery was created and calibrated using historical data from NHS England (April 2017 to March 2020) and was used to investigate the possible consequences of unmet demand resulting from fewer patients entering the treatment pathway and recovery strategies. NJR data were used to estimate the deficit of hip and knee arthroplasty by August 2020 and NHS tariff costs were used to calculate the financial burden. Results. By November 2020, the elective waiting list in England is predicted to be between 885,286 and 1,028,733. If reduced hospital capacity is factored into the model, returning to full capacity by November, the waiting list could be as large as 1.4 million. With a 30% increase in productivity, it would take 20 months if there was no hidden burden of unreferred patients, and 48 months if there was a hidden burden, to return to pre-COVID-19 waiting list numbers. By August 2020, the estimated deficits of hip and knee arthroplasties from NJR data were 18,298 (44.8%) and 16,567 (38.6%), respectively, compared to the same time period in 2019. The cost to clear this black log would be £198,811,335. Conclusion. There will be up to 1.4 million patients on elective orthopaedic waiting lists in England by November 2020, approximate three-times the pre-COVID-19 average. There are various strategies for recovery to return to pre-COVID-19 waiting list numbers reliant on increasing capacity, but these have substantial cost implications. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):103–110

Aims. Our primary aim was to establish the proportion of female orthopaedic consultants who perform arthroplasty via cases submitted to the National Joint Registry (NJR), which covers England, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Guernsey. Secondary aims included comparing time since specialist registration, private practice participation, and number of hospitals worked in between male and female surgeons. Methods. Publicly available data from the NJR was extracted on the types of arthroplasty performed by each surgeon, and the number of procedures of each type undertaken. Each surgeon was cross-referenced with the General Medical Council (GMC) website, using GMC number to extract surgeon demographic data. These included sex, region of practice, and dates of full and specialist registration. Results. Of 2,895 surgeons contributing to the NJR in 2023, 102 (4%) were female. The highest proportions of female surgeons were among those who performed elbow (n = 25; 5%), shoulder (n = 24; 4%), and ankle (n = 8; 4%) arthroplasty. Hip (n = 66; 3%) and knee arthroplasty (n = 39; 2%) had the lowest female representation. Female surgeons had been practising for a median of 10.4 years since specialist registration compared to 13.7 years for males (p < 0.001). Northern Ireland was the region with the highest proportion of female arthroplasty surgeons (8%). A greater proportion of male surgeons worked in private practice (63% vs 24%; p < 0.001) and in multiple hospitals (74% vs 40%; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Only 4% of surgeons currently contributing cases to the NJR are female, with the highest proportion performing elbow arthroplasty (5%). Female orthopaedic surgeons in the NJR are earlier in their careers than male surgeons, and are less involved in private practice. There is a wide geographical variation in the proportion of female arthroplasty surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):637–643

Aims. The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery services in a district general hospital in England in order to understand the spinal service provisions that may be required during a pandemic. Methods. A prospective cohort study was undertaken between 17 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 and compared with retrospective data from same time period in 2019. We compared the number of patients requiring acute hospital admission or orthopaedic referrals and indications of referrals from our admission sheets and obtained operative data from our theatre software. Results. Between 17 March to 30 April 2020, there were 48 acute spine referrals as compared to 68 acute referrals during the same time period last year. In the 2019 period, 69% (47/68) of cases referred to the on-call team presented with back pain, radiculopathy or myelopathy compared to 43% (21/48) in the 2020 period. Almost 20% (14/68) of spine referrals consisted of spine trauma as compared to 35% (17/48) this year. There were no confirmed cases of cauda equine last year during this time. Overall, 150 spine cases were carried out during this time period last year, and 261 spine elective cases were cancelled since 17 March 2020. Recommendations. We recommend following steps can be helpful to deal with similar situations or new pandemics in future:. 24 hours on-call spine service during the pandemic. Clinical criteria in place to prioritize urgent spinal cases. Pre-screening spine patients before elective operating. Start of separate specialist trauma list for patients needing urgent surgeries. Conclusion. This paper highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a district general hospital of England. We demonstrate a decrease in hospital attendances of spine pathologies, despite an increase in emergency spine operations. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:281–286

Abstract. Introduction. Specialist Spinal Services provide operative and non-operative management strategies for a variety of conditions ranging from simple pathologies to complex disabling conditions. The existing spinal hub and spoke model implemented in 2015 nationally across the NHS. We aim to assess the effectiveness and pitfalls of the Spinal hub and spoke model in this questionnaire-based study. Methods. We conducted a prospective questionnaire-based study in the Northwest England and attendees of the BOA conference in 2021. Questionnaires included from the hospitals with no local spinal services and those with on-site services were excluded. Questions specific to initial assessment, referrals process, MRI availability, and awareness of Spine Hub and Spoke model. Results. Data collected from 254 orthopaedic surgeons including residents from different regions. Ninety per cent of initial assessments done in the emergency department by doctors without spinal experience. The spinal referral process took between 4–12 hours to receive an opinion. The initial advice given by middle grades of hub following the spinal referrals. 86% of hospitals had no provision to obtain MRI scans out of hours. 90% of orthopaedic surgeons were not confident to convey spine referral outcomes and review them in local clinics. Only 46% surgeons satisfaction with the current model. 78% of middle grades were not aware of the Hub and spoke model. Conclusions. Our survey identified that orthopaedic surgeons expressed the need for local spinal services for non-urgent cases. Based on this survey we recommend a restructuring of the hub and spoke model across hospitals in the NHS

Introduction. Compartment syndrome can be a life changing consequence of injury to a limb. If not diagnosed and treated early it can lead to permanent disability. Neurovascular observations done on the ward by nursing staff, are often our early warning system to those developing compartment syndrome. But are these adequate for detecting the early signs of compartment syndrome? Our aim was to compare the quality and variability of charts across the UK major trauma network. Materials & Methods. All major trauma centres in England and Scotland were invited to supply a copy of the neurovascular chart routinely used. We assessed how such charts record relevant information. Specific primary data points included were pain scores, analgesia requirements, pain on passive stretch and decreased sensation in the first web space specifically. As secondary objectives, we assessed how late signs were recorded, whether clear instructions were included, quantitative scores and the use of regional blocks recorded. Results. A response rate of 46% was achieved. Of the charts reviewed, 25% documented pain scores or pain on passive movement. Pain on movement and analgesia requirements were documented in 33% and 8% respectively. Specific sensation within the 1. st. webspace was recorded in 16%. No charts recorded use of regional block. All charts recorded global sensation, movement (unspecified), pulse and colour whilst 66% documented capillary refill and 83% temperature. Instructions were included in 41% of charts. Conclusions. In 2016, the BOA supported publication of an observation chart for this purpose however, it is not widely used. In our study, late signs of compartment syndrome were generally well recorded. However, documentation of early signs and regional blocks was poor. This may lead to delays in diagnosis with significant clinical and medicolegal consequences. Standardisation of documentation by updating and promoting the use of the pre-existing chart would ensure highest quality care across the network

Introduction. We undertook a qualitative study to explore what is important to people with lower limb conditions requiring reconstruction (LLR) and how it impacted their quality of life (QOL), in order to develop a conceptual framework for a new patient reported outcome measure (PROM). This builds on a previous qualitative evidence synthesis of existing research to develop a preliminary conceptual framework as part of the Patient Reported Outcomes for Lower Limb Reconstruction (PROLLIT) study. Materials and Methods. Patients (n=32) and Orthopaedic staff (n=23) were interviewed (November 2020-June 2021) from three centres in England using one-to-one, semi-structured interviews. Patient interviews focused on experiences during and after LLR, including impact on QOL. Staff interviews explored important outcomes and goals for patients and how the LLR impacted QOL. Recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Results. The conceptual framework consists of 6 overarching factors important to patients: Pain, Identity, Work, Daily lifestyle, Emotional well-being and Support. These factors are not independent of each other, rather they're all interrelated (e.g. pain impacts identity, work, emotional well-being and daily lifestyle. Work impacts identity, pain, emotional well-being and daily lifestyle). Support from the hospital, physiotherapists and family underpins the other factors and acts as a moderator of their influence. Conclusions. This conceptual framework displays key factors important to patients after a LLR. Further research is required to map these factors onto existing PROMs to establish whether the factors we identified are captured by existing PROMs

Introduction. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a rapidly implemented restructuring of UK healthcare services. The The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, became a central hub for the provision of trauma services for North Central/East London (NCEL) while providing a musculoskeletal tumour service for the south of England, the Midlands, and Wales and an urgent spinal service for London. This study reviews our paediatric practice over this period in order to share our experience and lessons learned. Our hospital admission pathways are described and the safety of surgical and interventional radiological procedures performed under general anaesthesia (GA) with regards to COVID-19 in a paediatric population are evaluated. Methods. All paediatric patients (≤ 16 years) treated in our institution during the six-week peak period of the pandemic were included. Prospective data for all paediatric trauma and urgent elective admissions and retrospective data for all sarcoma admissions were collected. Telephone interviews were conducted with all patients and families to assess COVID-19 related morbidity at 14 days post-discharge. Results. Overall, 100 children underwent surgery or interventional radiological procedures under GA between 20 March and 8 May 2020. There were 35 trauma cases, 20 urgent elective orthopaedic cases, two spinal emergency cases, 25 admissions for interventional radiology procedures, and 18 tumour cases. 78% of trauma cases were performed within 24 hours of referral. In the 97% who responded at two weeks following discharge, there were no cases of symptomatic COVID-19 in any patient or member of their households. Conclusion. Despite the extensive restructuring of services and the widespread concerns over the surgical and anaesthetic management of paediatric patients during this period, we treated 100 asymptomatic patients across different orthopaedic subspecialties without apparent COVID-19 or unexpected respiratory complications in the early postoperative period. The data provides assurance for health care professionals and families and informs the consenting process. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:287–292

Aims. Tuberculosis (TB) infection of bones and joints accounts for 6.7% of TB cases in England, and is associated with significant morbidity and disability. Public Health England reports that patients with TB experience delays in diagnosis and treatment. Our aims were to determine the demographics, presentation and investigation of patients with a TB infection of bones and joints, to help doctors assessing potential cases and to identify avoidable delays. Patients and Methods. This was a retrospective observational study of all adults with positive TB cultures on specimens taken at a tertiary orthopaedic centre between June 2012 and May 2014. A laboratory information system search identified the patients. The demographics, clinical presentation, radiology, histopathology and key clinical dates were obtained from medical records. Results. A total of 31 adult patients were identified. Their median age was 37 years (interquartile range (IQR): 29 to 53); 21 (68%) were male; 89% were migrants. The main sites affected were joints (10, 32%), the spine (8, 26%) and long bones (6, 19%); 8 (26%) had multifocal disease. The most common presenting symptoms were pain (29/31, 94%) and swelling (26/28, 93%). ‘Typical’ symptoms of TB, such as fever, sweats and weight loss, were uncommon. Patients waited a median of seven months (IQR 3 to 13.5) between the onset of symptoms and referral to the tertiary centre and 2.3 months (IQR 1.6 to 3.4.)) between referral and starting treatment. Radiology suggested TB in 26 (84%), but in seven patients (23%) the initial biopsy specimens were not sent for mycobacterial culture, necessitating a second biopsy. Rapid Polymerase Chain Reaction-based testing for TB using Xpert MTB/RIF was performed in five patients; 4 (80%) tested positive for TB. These patients had a reduced time between the diagnostic biopsy and starting treatment than those whose samples were not tested (median eight days versus 36 days, p = 0.016). Conclusion. Patients with bone and joint TB experience delays in diagnosis and treatment, some of which are avoidable. Maintaining a high index of clinical suspicion and sending specimens for mycobacterial culture are crucial to avoid missing cases. Rapid diagnostic tests reduce delays and should be performed on patients with radiological features of TB. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:119–24

It is unusual, if not unique, for three major research papers concerned with the management of the fractured neck of femur (FNOF) to be published in a short period of time, each describing large prospective randomized clinical trials. These studies were conducted in up to 17 countries worldwide, involving up to 80 surgical centers and include large numbers of patients (up to 2,900) with FNOF. Each article investigated common clinical dilemmas; the first paper comparing total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for FNOF, the second as to whether ‘fast track’ care offers improved clinical outcomes and the third, compares sliding hip with multiple cancellous hip screws. Each paper has been deemed of sufficient quality and importance to warrant publication in The Lancet or the New England Journal of Medicine. Although ‘premier’ journals, they only occationally contain orthopaedic studies and thus may not be routinely read by the busy orthopaedic/surgical clinician of any grade. It is therefore our intention with this present article to accurately summarize and combine the results of all three papers, presenting, in our opinion, the most important clinically relevant facts. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:198–202

Aims. Infective complications following implant related orthopaedic surgery or fracture related infection are associated with high costs and increased length of stay (LOS). However, the economic burden of disease before, during and after definitive osteomyelitis surgery is not well quantified. The Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database captures all admissions, outpatient appointments and emergency department attendances at NHS hospitals in England. We identified all patients with a diagnostic code of osteomyelitis and quantified the tariff costs associated with the surgical treatment of osteomyelitis. We also collected all recorded healthcare events related to osteomyelitis for two years preceding the initial osteomyelitis treatment procedure, as well as for two years after the procedure. We compared average osteomyelitis treatment costs in England against a dedicated specialist multidisciplinary bone infection centre. Methods. We interrogated the HES database for all patients given a diagnostic code of osteomyelitis (M86) between April 2013 and January 2017. We excluded all cases with a diagnosis of osteomyelitis and an index procedure of an amputation for diabetes or arterial disease. Of the remaining 104,622 patients there were 24,408 cases who had their index procedure for osteomyelitis in this time period. Of these we compared a subset of 575 cases treated in a specialist bone infection centre. Results. Index procedure costs were lower in specialist centres compared to national average (£4100.09 vs. 4835.59) equating to a potential saving of £4.67 million per year if all cases were treated in similar specialist centres. Average LOS for the index procedure was lower in the specialist centre (12.4 days) compared to the national average (17.3 days). Assuming a bed cost of £500 per day, treating all patients in similar specialist centres could save £15.95 million per year. The post procedure costs were lower for specialist centre patients compared to national average, equating to a potential saving of £7.42 million per year. The average post procedural LOS in the national cohort was 2.44 days longer than the specialist centre, equating to an additional 15,508 bed days per year. Conclusions. Although tariff costs do not reflect true costs this study demonstrates that osteomyelitis is a significant economic burden to the English health service. Treating infection in dedicated specialist multidisciplinary centres requires a lot of resources and costs a lot of money. However, treating infection outside this environment seems to cost more and results in longer inpatient stays and higher associated costs

Introduction. Ashford and St Peter's Hospital (ASPH) is a district general hospital in Chertsey, Surrey. It is a tertiary referral unit offering a circular frame service to manage complex trauma patients in the South East of England. This study analyses the patient pathway in 66 consecutive tertiary referrals from 2015–2020. All patients were managed with an Ilizarov frame for either a tibial plateau fracture or pilon fracture. Materials and Methods. The patient journey of 66 consecutive tertiary referrals for tibial plateau and pilon fractures were analysed. The following data was captured: patient demographics; type of injury; referring centre; date of injury; date of referral; date of arrival at ASPH; date of surgery and date of discharge. Using this data we aimed to identify areas of the pathway that can be improved. In addition, the 66 patients were split into two groups of 33 patients. 33 patients were referred via an electronic referral platform and 33 patients were referred verbally prior to the implementation of the electronic referral platform. The groups were compared to see the impact of an electronic referral platform on the patient's journey. Results. Average age 45 (range 17–88 years), Male percentage 54.55%, 45 tibial plateau patients, 21 pilon patients. Injury to Admission at ASPH- 6 days (median), Injury to Surgery 8 days (median), Surgery to Discharge 4 days (median), Total stay in ASPH 6 days (median). Conclusions. The biggest delay in our tertiary referral pathway is from referral to arrival at ASPH. The implementation of an electronic referral pathway has not improved times from referral to arrival at ASPH. Ring fenced beds for tertiary referrals would be the greatest way to improve flow through the pathway and reduce the complications related to delayed surgery

Aims. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, incidence of hip fracture has not changed. Evidence has shown increased mortality rates associated with COVID-19 infection. However, little is known about the outcomes of COVID-19 negative patients in a pandemic environment. In addition, the impact of vitamin D levels on mortality in COVID-19 hip fracture patients has yet to be determined. Methods. This multicentre observational study included 1,633 patients who sustained a hip fracture across nine hospital trusts in North West England. Data were collected for three months from March 2020 and for the same period in 2019. Patients were matched by Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS), hospital, and fracture type. We looked at the mortality outcomes of COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative patients sustaining a hip fracture. We also looked to see if vitamin D levels had an impact on mortality. Results. The demographics of the 2019 and 2020 groups were similar, with a slight increase in proportion of male patients in the 2020 group. The 30-day mortality was 35.6% in COVID-19 positive patients and 7.8% in the COVID-19 negative patients. There was a potential association of decreasing vitamin D levels and increasing mortality rates for COVID-19 positive patients although our findings did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. In 2020 there was a significant increase in 30-day mortality rates of patients who were COVID-19 positive but not of patients who were COVID-19 negative. Low levels of vitamin D may be associated with high mortality rates in COVID-19 positive patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):782–787

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the provision of orthopaedic care across the UK. During the pandemic orthopaedic specialist registrars were redeployed to “frontline” specialties occupying non-surgical roles. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic training in the UK is unknown. This paper sought to examine the role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on postgraduate orthopaedic education. Methods. A 42-point questionnaire was designed, validated, and disseminated via e-mail and an instant-messaging platform. Results. A total of 101 orthopaedic trainees, representing the four nations (Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland), completed the questionnaire. Overall, 23.1% (23/101) of trainees were redeployed to non-surgical roles. Of these, 73% (17/23) were redeployed to intensive treatment units (ITUs), 13% (3/23) to A/E, and 13%(3/23%) to general medicine. Of the trainees redeployed to ITU 100%, (17/17) received formal induction. Non-deployed or returning trainees had a significant reduction in sessions. In total, 42.9% (42/101) % of trainees were not timetabled into fracture clinic, 53% (53/101) of trainees had one allocated theatre list per week, and 63.8%(64/101) of trainees did not feel they obtained enough experience in the attached subspecialty and preferred repeating this. Overall, 93% (93/101) of respondents attended at least one weekly online webinar, with 79% (79/101) of trainees rating these as useful or very useful, while 95% (95/101) trainees attended online deanery teaching which was rated as more useful than online webinars (p = 0.005). Conclusion. Orthopaedic specialist trainees occupied an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has had a significant impact on orthopaedic training. It is imperative this is properly understood to ensure orthopaedic specialist trainees achieve competencies set out in the training curriculum. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:676–682

Medial knee OA effects approximately 4.1 million people in England. Non-surgical strategies to lower knee joint loading is commonly researched in the knee OA literature as a method to alleviate pain and discomfort. Medial knee OA is much more prevalent than lateral knee OA due to the weight bearing line passing medial to the knee causing an external knee adduction moment (KAM). Numerous potential gait retraining strategies have been proposed to reduce either the first and/or the second peak KAM, including: toe-in gait, toe-out gait, lateral trunk lean and medial thrust gait. Gait retraining has been researched with little regard to the biomechanical consequences at the hip and ankle joints. This systematic review aimed to establish whether gait retraining can reduce medial knee loading as assessed by first and second peak KAMs, establish what are the biomechanical effects a reduced KAM has on other lower limb joint biomechanics and outline patient/participant reported outcomes on how easy the gait retraining style was to implement. The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO on the 23rd January 2018 (registration ID: CRD42018085738). 13 databases were searched by one author (J.B.B). Additionally, PROSPERO was searched for ongoing or recently completed systematic reviews. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black quality index. Search: Group one consisted of keywords “walk” OR “gait”. Keywords “knee” OR “adduction moment” built up the second group. Group three consisted “osteoarthriti” OR “arthriti” OR “osteo arthriti”, OR “OA”. Group four included “hip” OR “ankle”. the searched results of each group were combined with conjunction “AND” in all fields. Out of the eight different gait retraining strategies identified, trunk lean reduced first peak KAM the most, which was evaluated in 3 studies, reducing first peak KAM by 20%-65%. There was a lack of collective pelvic, hip and/or ankle joint biomechanical variables reported across all 11 studies. Of eight gait retraining styles identified, the strategy that reduced first peak KAM the most was an increased lateral trunk lean, which was evaluated in 3 different studies. This is the first systematic review that has highlighted that there is limited evidence of the biomechanical consequences of a reduced knee joint load has on the pelvic, hip and/or ankle joints when undertaking gait retraining protocols. Future studies assessing gait retraining strategies should provide biomechanical outputs for other lower limb joints other than the knee joint, as well as providing participant perceptions on the level of difficulty the gait style is to perform

The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) published guidance for reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in January 2010. This guidance has had a significant impact on the management of all inpatients. It is now mandatory to risk assess every inpatient and commence appropriate treatment if indicated. The guidelines specifically exclude outpatients although NICE recognises' that lower limb cast immobilisation is a risk factor for VTE. The purpose of our study was to establish the current practice for the management of outpatients treated with lower limb casts in England. The NHS Choices website lists 166 acute hospitals in England. A telephone audit was conducted in February 2011. A member of the on call orthopaedic team was asked: 1. Are you aware of the NICE guidelines for VTE prophylaxis? 2. In your department, outpatients treated with a lower limb cast, are they risk assessed for VTE? 3. If a patient undergoes Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) for an ankle fracture and is discharged wearing a cast, are they given VTE prophylaxis? 4. If yes - for how long are they treated?. Responses were obtained from 150 eligible hospitals (1 FY1, 28 FY2, 44 ST1-ST2, 76 ST3+, 1 Consultant). 62% of responders stated that they were aware of the NICE guidance. 40% of responders stated that outpatients were routinely risk assessed for VTE. 32% of responders stated that ankle fractures treated with an ORIF and discharged wearing a cast would receive VTE prophylaxis. The duration of treatment varied from 5 days, to 6 weeks, to removal of cast. The management of patients treated with a lower limb cast is variable and inconsistent throughout England. Although there are no national guidelines for this patient group, the routine risk assessment of outpatients was higher than anticipated by the authors. We recommend that if VTE prophylaxis is commenced as an inpatient, then it should be continued until the cast is removed

To propose a national specification for hospitals which offer treatment of complex bone and joint infections to adults. Patients with bone and joint infections are treated in a wide variety of hospitals in the UK. A few have developed services with infection physicians, microbiology laboratory support and dedicated orthopaedic and plastic surgeons working together to deliver a multidisciplinary care pathway. However, many patients are treated in non-specialist units leading to multiple, often unsuccessful procedures with long hospital stays, high costs and additional pain and disability. Inappropriate antibiotic therapy without adequate surgery risks antibiotic resistance. A draft specification was written defining the types of patients who should be referred to a specialist unit for treatment. A description of the components which must be available to treat these cases (staffing, expertise, diagnostic support, outcome assessment and governance structure) was proposed. This draft was circulated to infection units in the UK for consideration and agreed with the Health Department in England. Complex bone and joint infections would be best served nationally by 3–6 networks, each with a single specialist centre. This is similar to national arrangements for bone sarcoma treatment. Patients to be referred will include those with:. Chronic osteomyelitis (long bone, pelvis, spine). Chronic destructive septic arthritis. Complex prosthetic joint infections (multiple co-morbidities, difficult/multi-resistant organisms, multiply operated or failed revision surgery). Infected fractures and non-unions. Specialist units should have:. Orthopaedic surgeons who specialise in infection (joint revision, Ilizarov techniques, etc). Infection physicians who can treat medically unwell patients with complex co-mordidities and multi-resistant infections. Plastic surgeons with experience in difficult microsurgical reconstruction techniques. Scheduled (at least weekly) meetings of all of the above, with a radiologist to discuss new referrals and complex cases. A home IV therapy service. Dedicated in-patient beds staffed by infection trained staff. Multi-disciplinary (one-stop) out-patient clinics. Quality measures assessed, including PROMS, clinical success rates, and functional outcome. Education and research programmes. This service specification is a tool for developing regional units. It facilitates the creation of designated centres in a national network (hub and spoke model). This service specification has been agreed and published by NHS England

Background. Over 10% of total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeries performed in England and Wales are revision procedures. 1. Malorientation of the acetabular component in THA may contribute to premature failure. Yet with increasingly younger populations receiving THA surgery (through higher incidences of obesity) and longer life expectancy in general, the lifetime of an implant needs to increase to avoid a rapid increase in revision surgery in the future. The Evaluation of X-ray, Acetabular Guides and Computerised Tomography in THA (EXACT) trial is assessing the pelvic tilt of a patient by capturing x-rays from the patient in sitting, standing and step-up positions. It uses this information, along with a CT scan image, to deliver a personalised dynamic simulation that outputs an optimised position for the hip replacement. A clinical trial is currently in place to investigate how the new procedure improves patient outcomes. 2. . Our aim in this project was to assess whether accurate functional assessment of pelvic tilt could be further obtained using inertial measurement units (IMUs). This would provide a rapid, non-invasive triaging method such that only patients with high levels of tilt measured by the sensors would then receive the full assessment with x-rays. Methods. Recruited patients were fitted with a bespoke device consisting of a 3D-printed clamp which housed the IMU and fitted around the sacrum area. A wide elastic belt was fitted around the patient's waist to keep the device in place. Pelvic tilt is measured in a standing, flexed seated and step-up position while undergoing X-rays with the IMU capturing the data in parallel. Patients further completed another five repetitions of the movements with the IMU but without the x-ray to test repeatability of the measurements. Statistical analysis included measures of correlation between the X-ray and IMU measurements. Results. Data on 30 patients indicated a moderate-strong correlation (R. 2. =0.87) between IMU and radiological measures of pelvic tilt. Key message. A novel device has been developed that can suitably track pelvic movements to stratify patients into risk categories for post-operative dislocations

Aims

In the UK, the NHS generates an estimated 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (4% to 5% of the nation’s total carbon emissions) and produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. There is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery and the environmentally sustainable initiatives undertaken to address this. The secondary aim of this study was to describe the barriers to making sustainable changes within orthopaedic surgery.