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. Limb length discrepancy after THA can result in medicolegal litigation. It can create discomfort for the patient and potentially cause back pain or affect the longevity of the implant. Some patients tolerate the length inequality better compared to others despite difference in anatomical femoral length after surgery. Methods and materials. We analyzed the 3D EOS images of 75 consecutive patients who underwent primary unilateral THA (27 men, 48 women). We measured the 3D length of the femur and tibia (anatomical length), the 3D global anatomical length (the sum of femur and tibia anatomical lengths), the 3D functional length (center of the femoral head to center of the ankle), femoral neck-shaft angle, hip-knee-ankle angle, knee flexum/recurvatum angle, sacral slopes and pelvic incidence. We correlated these parameters with the patient perception of the leg length. Results. The values for leg length and pelvic parameters are shown in table 1. 37 patients had a perception of the LLD (49.3%). When the global anatomical length was shorter on the operated side, the perception of the discrepancy was observed in 56% of the cases. In case of anatomical length longer on the operated side, the perception of the discrepancy was described by the patients in 46% of the cases. The LLD perception was correlated with difference in functional length (p=0.0001), pelvic obliquity (p=0.003) and sacral slope (p=0.023). The anatomical femoral length was not correlated with the LLD perception (p=0,008). Discussion. The perception of LLD is a multifactorial complication. We found that the anatomical femoral length (that can be directly affected by the position of the stem) is not the only important factor. The functional length of the lower extremity which can also be affected by the knee deformities is better correlated with the LLD. The pelvic obliquity and version also affect the patient perception of the LLD

Introduction. Around the knee high-energy fractures/dislocation may present with vascular injuries. Ischaemia time i.e. the time interval from injury to reperfusion surgery is the only variable that the surgeon can influence. It has been traditionally taught that 6-8 hours is revascularisation acceptable. There are only limited case series that have documented the time-dependent lower limb salvage rate (LSR) or the lower limb amputation rate (LAR). We have conducted a meta-analysis to look at LSR and LAR to inform clinical standard setting and for medicolegal purposes. Methods. Two authors conducted an independent literature search using PubMed, Ovid, and Embase. In addition the past 5 years issues of Journal of Trauma, Injury and Journal of Vascular surgery were manually scrutinised. Papers included those in the English language that discussed limb injuries around the knee, and time to limb salvage or amputation surgery. The Oxman and Guyatt index was used to score each paper. Results. 21 retrospective case series articles were identified from 8 different journals. A total of 1575 patients were compiled, 92 patients were lost or died. 263 lower limbs underwent amputation and 1220 limbs were salvaged. 984 lower limbs were salvaged within the 8 hours. The LAR increased with time from 3% with reperfusion surgery in less than 4 hours to 13% at 6 hours and 32% at 8 hours. A lower LAR of 20% for patients presenting after 12 hours was seen

Assessing risk is a key skill for all surgeons, playing a vital role in such diverse settings informed consent, audit and surgical planning. We undertook this study to define what is an acceptable level of risk for orthopaedic surgeons undertaking lower limb arthroplasty in today's medicolegal climate. We surveyed all consultants and trainees registered with the NZOA and asked them what change in their complication rate would cause them to consider changing their practice. We also asked them how certain they would have to be that this change was real and not simply due to chance (the so-called “cluster effect”). The specific complications we considered were DVT/PE, dislocation of total hip replacement or deep infection in lower limb arthroplasty patients. This allowed us to calculate with 95% accuracy the levels of complication surgeons would deem unacceptable. Using Cochrane's criteria for statistically valid survey results we obtained a greater than 95% representative sample. From these responses we calculated levels of complication which would worry the “average” surgeon (median value), the “vast majority” (95%) of surgeons and a change in complication rate which would be required to satisfy “statistical significance” (i.e. the level set literature proof with p<0.05 and power of 0.8). When considering deep infection following hip or knee arthroplasty: using a baseline of 0.9% as an average published rate, the average surgeon would consider changing their practice if their rate reached 2.5% and 95% of surgeons would consider changing if their rate reached 5%. For hip dislocation the baseline was set at 2.5% with the average surgeon intervening if their rate rose to 4% and the vast majority of surgeons intervening at 10%. For fatal PE the baseline was given as 0.2% with the average surgeon auditing their practice at 0.8% and the vast majority of surgeons concerned with a rate of 2.2% or higher. No difference was found in consultant/trainee responses except in the reason given for use of thromboprophylaxis where consultants used it for prevention of fatal PE and registrars for non-fatal PE. These results could be used both as a potential guide for trainees and consultants in audit and also in guiding the use of, for instance, thromboprophylaxis where the “number needed to treat” for low molecular weight heparin to prevent one fatal pulmonary embolus in a year would necessitate national use/guidelines

The causes of a stiff elbow are numerous including: post-traumatic elbow, burns, head injury, osteoarthritis, inflammatory joint disease and congenital. Types of stiffness include: loss of elbow flexion, loss of elbow extension and loss of forearm rotation. All three have different prognoses in terms of the timing of surgery and the likelihood of restoration of function. Contractures can be classified into extrinsic and intrinsic (all intrinsic develop some extrinsic component). Functional impairment can be assessed medicolegally; however, in clinical practice the patient puts an individual value on the arc of motion. Objectively most functions can be undertaken with an arc of 30 to 130 degrees. The commonest cause of a Post-traumatic Stiff elbow is a radial head fracture or a complex fracture dislocation. Risk factors for stiffness include length of immobilisation, associated fracture with dislocation, intra-articular derangement, delayed surgical treatment, associated head injury, heterotopic ossification. Early restoration of bony columns and joint stability to allow early mobilisation reduces incidence of joint stiffness. Heterotopic ossification (HO) is common in fracture dislocation of the elbow. Neural Axis trauma alone causes HO in elbows in 5%. However, combined neural trauma and elbow trauma the incidence is 89%. Stiffness due to thermal injury is usually related to the degree rather than the site. The majority of patients have greater than 20% total body area involved. Extrinsic contractures are usually managed with a sequential release of soft tissues commencing with a capsular excision (retaining LCL/MCL), posterior bundle of the MCL +/− ulna nerve decompression (if there is loss of flexion to 100 degrees). This reliably achieved via a posterior incision, a lateral column exposure +/− ulna nerve mobilisation. A medial column exposure is a viable alternative. Arthroscopic capsular release although associated with a quicker easier rehabilitation is associated with increased neural injury. Timing of release is specific to the type of contracture, i.e. flexion contractures after approx. six months, extension contractures ASAP but after four months, loss of forearm rotation less 6 to 24 months. The use of Hinged Elbow Fixators is increasing. The indications include reconstructions that require protection whilst allowing early movement, persistent instability or recurrent/late instability or interposition arthroplasty. Post-operative rehabilitation requires good analgesia, joint stability and early movement. The role of CPM is often helpful but still being evaluated

Informed consent is vital for good patient-surgeon communication. It allows the patient to be given an unbiased and accurate view of the procedure as well giving an opportunity for patients to gain trust in their surgical team. The consent form is written evidence of this discussion and a poor consent form implies a sub-standard consenting process. The General Medical Council (GMC) have issued guidelines for consent in surgical procedures. These state that all common risks and rare but serious risks should be disclosed as well as all information being given in clear simple and consistent language. Currently, the consent form for a hip fracture operation is hand written. Our hypothesis was that the quality of consenting is variable and that many important complications may not be identified. The British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) blue book, ‘The care of patients with fragility fractures,’ has given guidance of common and serious complications associated with operative management of hip fractures. In addition to these procedure specific complications, we have identified general complications from standardised joint arthroplasty consent forms in our trust, such as deep vein thrombosis. Our standards based on GMC guidance are that the consent form should be legible, free from jargon, without abbreviations and should include the specific and general complications. We retrospectively identified and analysed 30 consecutive consent forms of patients that underwent operative management for hip fractures between March and April 2011. Of all consent forms, 59% were completely or partly illegible, 77% had used abbreviations and medical jargon. Inclusion of general complications on the consent form varied; infection 100%, bleeding 100%, deep vein thrombosis 82%, MI 18%, pneumonia 12%, death 12% and haematoma 0%. Specific operative complications were poorly included, with no patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty being advised of the risk of prosthetic loosening, acetabular wear or periprosthetic fractures. For consent of patients undergoing fracture fixation, 67% had been informed of re-operation and 40% had been told of non-union. This data shows that consent forms are generally poorly written and subject to great variation in complications for the same surgical procedure. This data is likely to apply to some extent to all hospitals that use blank consent forms. This has implications for patient care and safety, as well as medicolegal implications for medical professionals. In our hospital, consent forms have been standardised for joint arthroplasty, with all complication pre-printed with plain English explanations below. Our proposal is that all common operations should have pre-printed consent forms. This would standardise consenting and provide a much improved documentary evidence of the consenting process. This data has a number of lessons that can be applied to other hospitals. Firstly, we suggest that other hospitals consider standardised consent forms. Secondly, individual trainees should be clear that consent forms remain the documentary evidence of the consenting process, long after you forget the verbal details and you should ensure that you include all complications, write clearly and without jargon or abbreviations

Aims

Elective operating was halted during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase the capacity to provide care to an unprecedented volume of critically unwell patients. During the pandemic, the orthopaedic department at the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board restructured the trauma service, relocating semi-urgent ambulatory trauma operating to the isolated clean elective centre (St. Woolos’ Hospital) from the main hospital receiving COVID-19 patients (Royal Gwent Hospital). This study presents our experience of providing semi-urgent trauma care in a COVID-19-free surgical unit as a safe way to treat trauma patients during the pandemic and a potential model for restarting an elective orthopaedic service.