Introduction. The knee is the most commonly injured joint in sporting accidents, leading to substantial disability, time off work and morbidity (1). Treatment and assessment vary around the UK (2), whilst there remains a limited number of high-quality randomised controlled trials assessing first time, acute soft tissue knee injuries (3,4). As the clinical and financial burden rises (5), vital answers are required to improve prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and delivery of care. In association with the James Lind Alliance, this BASK, BOSTAA and BOA supported prioritising exercise was undertaken over a year. Methods. The James Lind Alliance methodology was followed; a modified nominal group technique was used in the final workshop. An initial survey invited patients and healthcare professionals to submit their uncertainties regarding soft tissue knee injury prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and delivery of care. Seventy-four questions were formulated to encompass common concerns. These were checked against best available evidence. Following the interim survey, 27 questions were taken forward to the final workshop in January 2023, where they were discussed, ranked, and scored in multiple rounds of prioritisation by groups of healthcare professionals, patients, and carers. Results. Over 1000 questions were submitted initially. Twenty-seven were taken forward to the final workshop following the surveys. Nearly half of the responses were from patients/carers. The Top 10 (Figure 1) includes prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation questions, reflecting the concerns of patients, carers, and a wider multidisciplinary team. Conclusion. This validated process has generated an important, wide- ranging Top 10 priorities for future soft tissue knee injury research. These have been submitted to the National Institute for Health and Care Research and are now available for researchers to investigate. The final 27 questions which were taken to the final workshop have also been published on the James Lind Alliance website. Research into these questions will lead to future high-quality research, thus improving patient care & outcomes. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe the current pathways of care for patients with a fracture of the hip in five low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) in South Asia (Nepal and Sri Lanka) and Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines). Methods. The World Health Organization Service Availability and Readiness Assessment tool was used to collect data on the care of hip fractures in Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Nepal. Respondents were asked to provide details about the current pathway of care for patients with hip fracture, including pre-hospital transport, time to admission, time to surgery, and time to weightbearing, along with healthcare professionals involved at different stages of care, information on discharge, and patient follow-up. Results. Responses were received from 98 representative hospitals across the five countries. Most hospitals were publicly funded. There was consistency in clinical pathways of care within country, but considerable variation between countries. Patients mostly travel to hospital via ambulance (both publicly- and privately-funded) or private transport, with only half arriving at hospital within 12 hours of their injury. Access to surgery was variable and time to surgery ranged between one day and more than five days. The majority of hospitals mobilized patients on the first or second day after surgery, but there was notable variation in postoperative weightbearing protocols. Senior medical input was variable and specialist orthogeriatric expertise was unavailable in most hospitals. Conclusion. This study provides the first step in mapping care pathways for patients with hip fracture in LMIC in South Asia. The previous lack of data in these countries hampers efforts to identify quality standards (key performance indicators) that are relevant to each different healthcare system. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):676–681

The UK falls behind other European countries in the early detection of Developmental Dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and there remains controversy surrounding screening strategies for early detection. Clinical detection of DDH is challenging and recognised to be dependent on examiner experience. No studies exist assessing the number of personnel currently involved in such assessments. Our objective was to study the current screening procedure by studying a cohort of new-born babies in one teaching hospital and assess the number of health professionals involved in neonatal hip assessment and the number of examinations undertaken during one period by each individual. This was a retrospective observational study assessing all babies born consecutively over a 14-week period in 2020. Record of each initial baby check was obtained from Maternity or Neonatal Badger. Follow-up data on ultrasound or orthopaedic outpatient referrals were obtained from clinical records. 1037 babies were examined by 65 individual examiners representing 9 different healthcare professional groups. The range of examinations conducted per examiner was 1- 97 with a mean of 15.9 examinations per person. 49% individuals examined 5 or less babies across the 14 weeks, with 18% only performing 1 examination. Of the 5 babies (0.48%) treated for DDH, one was picked up on neonatal assessment. In a system where so many examiners are involved in neonatal hip assessment the experience is limited for most examiners. It is unsurprising that high current rates of late presentation of DDH are observed locally, which are in accordance with published national experience

Aims. Patient engagement in adaptive health behaviours and interactions with their healthcare ecosystem can be measured using self-reported instruments, such as the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13) and the Effective Consumer Scale (ECS-17). Few studies have investigated the influence of patient engagement on limitations (patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). First, we assessed whether patient engagement (PAM-13, ECS-17) within two to four weeks of an upper limb fracture was associated with limitations (the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Physical Function computer adaptive test (PROMIS UE PF) scores) measured six to nine months after fracture, accounting for demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors. Secondly, we assessed the association between patient engagement and experience (numerical rating scale for satisfaction with care (NRS-C) and satisfaction with services (NRS-S) six to nine months after fracture. Methods. A total of 744 adults with an isolated fracture of the proximal humerus, elbow, or distal radius completed PROMs. Due to multicollinearity of patient engagement and psychosocial variables, we generated a single variable combining measures of engagement and psychosocial factors using factor analysis. We then performed multivariable analysis with p < 0.10 on bivariate analysis. Results. Patient engagement and psychosocial factors combined to form a single factor (factor 1) accounting for 20% (QuickDASH, semi-partial R. 2. = 0.20) and 14% (PROMIS UE PF, semi-partial R. 2. = 0.14) of the variation in limitations six to nine months after fracture. Factor 1 also accounted for 17% (NRS-C, semi-partial R. 2. = 0.17) of variation in satisfaction with care, and 21% (NRS-S, semi-partial R. 2. = 0.21) of variation in satisfaction with services. Demographic factors (age, sex, work status) and measures of greater pathophysiology (type of fracture, high-energy injury, post-surgical complications), accounted for much less variation. Conclusion. Patients who actively manage their health and demonstrate effective emotional and social functioning share a common underlying trait. They have fewer limitations and greater satisfaction with care during recovery from upper limb fractures. Future efforts should focus on evaluating initiatives that optimize patient engagement, such as patient education, coaching, and a communication strategy for healthcare professionals. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):42–47

Introduction. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to assess the quality of healthcare delivery in the United Kingdom. It is important when using PROMs to know the score of the background population against which any clinical intervention maybe benchmarked. The purpose of this study was to measure an elbow-specific PROM for the population of the South West Peninsula. Methods. We undertook a cross-sectional survey study of patients and healthcare professionals. Participants were asked to complete a simple demographic questionnaire and an Oxford Elbow Score for each elbow. Respondents with a history of elbow surgery, elbow injury, chronic elbow problems or an incomplete dataset were excluded from the study. Results. A total of 1782 respondents (3564 elbows) completed the survey. 574 questionnaires were excluded leaving 1208 individuals (2416 elbows) for analysis. The median scores for each decade group ranged between 46.74 and 48 out of 48. There was no significant difference in the score for age, gender or hand dominance. Conclusion. When using the Oxford Elbow Score to assess outcomes after surgery, a normal score should be used as the benchmark. This benchmark is independent of age, gender and hand dominance

Aims

To investigate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of older adults (aged ≥ 60 years) after tibial plateau fracture (TPF) compared to preinjury and population matched values, and what aspects of treatment were most important to patients.

Aims

We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture.

Aims

Though most humeral shaft fractures heal nonoperatively, up to one-third may lead to nonunion with inferior outcomes. The Radiographic Union Score for HUmeral Fractures (RUSHU) was created to identify high-risk patients for nonunion. Our study evaluated the RUSHU’s prognostic performance at six and 12 weeks in discriminating nonunion within a significantly larger cohort than before.

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.

Aims

Open fractures of the tibia are a heterogeneous group of injuries that can present a number of challenges to the treating surgeon. Consequently, few surgeons can reliably advise patients and relatives about the expected outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine whether these outcomes are predictable by using the Ganga Hospital Score (GHS). This has been shown to be a useful method of scoring open injuries to inform wound management and decide between limb salvage and amputation.

Aims

This study sought to determine the proportion of older adults with hip fractures captured by a multicentre prospective cohort, the World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE), whether there was evidence of selection bias during WHiTE recruitment, and the extent to which the WHiTE cohort is representative of the broader population of older adults with hip fractures.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with limitations in function, measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), six to nine months after a proximal humeral fracture, from a range of demographic, injury, psychological, and social variables measured within a week and two to four weeks after injury.