A multicentre retrospective study of 879 total hip replacements (THR) was undertaken to investigate any differences in outcome between trainee surgeons and consultants. The effect of trainee supervision was also assessed. The primary outcome measures were survivorship and the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Length of stay was a secondary outcome. Patients were evaluated pre-operatively and at 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 years post-operatively. Surgical outcome was compared between junior trainees, senior trainees and consultants. The effect of supervision was determined by comparing supervised and unsupervised trainees. There was no significant difference in post-operative HHS among consultants, senior and junior trainees at 1 year (p=0.122), at 3 years (p=0.282), at 5 years (p=0.063), at 7 years (p=0.875), or at 10 years (p=0.924) follow up. Additionally there was no significant difference in HHS between supervised and unsupervised trainees at 1 year (p=0.220), 3 years (p=0.0.542), 5 years (p=0.880), 7 years (p=0.953) and 10-year (p=0.787) follow-up. Comparison of surgical outcome between the supervised and unsupervised trainees also shows no significant difference in hospital stay (p=0.989), or implant survival years (p=0.257). This study provides evidence that when trainees are appropriately supervised, they can obtain equally good results compared with consultants when performing THR

Aims

Factors associated with high mortality rates in geriatric hip fracture patients are frequently unmodifiable. Time to surgery, however, might be a modifiable factor of interest to optimize clinical outcomes after hip fracture surgery. This study aims to determine the influence of postponement of surgery due to non-medical reasons on clinical outcomes in acute hip fracture surgery.

Introduction. We implemented an exhaustive operative and supervision algorithm for surgical treatment of hip fractures primarily based on own previously published literature. The purpose was to improve supervision and reduce the rate of reoperations. Materials and methods. 2000 consecutive unselected patients above 50 years admitted with a hip fracture were included, 1000 of these prospectively after implementation of the algorithm. Demographic parameters, hospital treatment and reoperations within the first postoperative year were assessed from patient records. The algorithm dictated the surgical treatment based on three objective patient parameters: age, new mobility score and fracture classification on pre-operative anterior-posterior and axial radiographs. Intra capsular fractures were treated with two parallel implants, a sliding hip screw, an arthroplasty or resection of the femoral head. Extra capsular fractures were treated with a sliding hip screw or an intramedullary nail. Supervision of junior registrars was mandatory for the prosthesis and intramedullary nail procedures. Results. 931/1000 operative procedures were operated according to the algorithm, compared to only 726/1000 prior to its introduction (p<0.001). Retrospectively we found that 13% (208/1657) of operative procedures performed as the algorithm dictated were reoperated compared to 28% (96/343) of operative procedures performed with other methods (p<0.001). In logistic regression analysis combining sex, age, ASA score, cognitive function, new mobility score and level of surgeon's experience, not following the algorithm was a predictor for re-operation (p<0.001 log. reg.). After implementing the algorithm, junior registrars still performed half of the operations, but unsupervised procedures declined from 192/1000 to 105/1000 (p=0.039). The rate of reoperations declined from 18% to 12% (p<0.001, log. reg.), with a 24% (112/467) to 18% (87/482) decline for intra capsular fractures (p=0.025) and a 13% (68/533) to 7% (37/518) decline for extra capsular fractures (p=0.002). The extra bed-days caused by reoperations were hereby reduced from 24% to 18% of total hospitalization. Conclusion. An exhaustive algorithm for hip fracture treatment can be implemented. In our case, the algorithm both raised the rate of supervision and reduced the rate of reoperations, the latter saving many hospital bed-days

Objectives

The PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation (PROFHER) trial has recently demonstrated that surgery is non-superior to non-operative treatment in the management of displaced proximal humeral fractures. The objective of this study was to assess current surgical practice in the context of the PROFHER trial in terms of patient demographics, injury characteristics and the nature of the surgical treatment.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines from 2011 recommend the use of cemented hemi-arthroplasty for appropriate patients with an intracapsular hip fracture. In our institution all patients who were admitted with an intracapsular hip fracture and were suitable for a hemi-arthroplasty between April 2010 and July 2012 received an uncemented prosthesis according to our established departmental routine practice. A retrospective analysis of outcome was performed to establish whether the continued use of an uncemented stem was justified. Patient, surgical and outcome data were collected on the National Hip Fracture database. A total of 306 patients received a Cathcart modular head on a Corail uncemented stem as a hemi-arthroplasty. The mean age of the patients was 83.3 years (sd 7.56; 46.6 to 94) and 216 (70.6%) were women. The mortality rate at 30 days was 5.8%. A total of 46.5% of patients returned to their own home by 30 days, which increased to 73.2% by 120 days. The implant used as a hemi-arthroplasty for intracapsular hip fracture provided satisfactory results, with a good rate of return to pre-injury place of residence and an acceptable mortality rate. Surgery should be performed by those who are familiar with the design of the stem and understand what is required for successful implantation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1538–43.

Aims

Fracture clinics are often characterised by the referral of large numbers of unselected patients with minor injuries not requiring investigation or intervention, long waiting times and recurrent unnecessary reviews. Our experience had been of an unsustainable system and we implemented a ‘Trauma Triage Clinic’ (TTC) in order to rationalise and regulate access to our fracture service. The British Orthopaedic Association’s guidelines have required a prospective evaluation of this change of practice, and we report our experience and results.