Background. Due to the overwhelming demand for trauma services, resulting from increasing emergency department attendances over the past decade, virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) have become the fashion to keep up with the demand and help comply with the BOA Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidelines. In this article, we perform a systematic review asking, “How useful are VFCs?”, and what injuries and conditions can be treated safely and effectively, to help decrease patient face to face consultations. Our primary outcomes were patient satisfaction, clinical efficiency and cost analysis, and clinical outcomes. Methods. We performed a systematic literature search of all papers pertaining to VFCs, using the search engines PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Searches were carried out and screened by two authors, with final study eligibility confirmed by the senior author. Results. In total, 21 records were relevant to our research question. Six orthopaedic injuries were identified as suitable for VFC review, with a further four discussed in detail. A reduction of face to face appointments of up to 50% was reported with greater compliance to BOAST guidelines (46.4%) and cost saving (up to £212,000). Conclusions. This systematic review demonstrates that the VFC model can help deliver a safe, more cost-effective, and more efficient arm of the trauma service to patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:683–690

The British Orthopedic Association recommends that patients referred to fracture clinic are reviewed within 72 hours. With the increase in referrals and limited clinic capacity it is becoming increasingly difficult to see every referral with in a 72 hour time frame. Some patients are waiting 2 weeks or more before they can be seen in a fracture clinic. With the aim of improving care by seeking to meet BOAST 7 target, waiting times for fracture clinic appointments at the Homerton University Hospital were audited prospectively against this national guideline, before virtual fracture clinic was implemented and 6 weeks after the implementation of virtual fracture clinic at our hospital. Virtual fracture clinic is where an Orthopedic consultant reviews a patients x-rays and A&E documentation and decides if that patients needs to be seen in a face to face fracture clinic to discuss operative vs. non-operative management of their injury or if a treatment plan can be delivered without the patient having to come back to hospital. The study was conducted as a prospective closed-loop audit in which the second cycle took place after the implementation of the new virtual fracture clinic service. The first cycle showed a non-compliant waiting time with only 18% of patients being seen within 72 hours. Following the implementation of virtual fracture clinic, 84% of all patients were reviewed within 72 hours. Virtual fracture clinic delivered a significant reduction in waiting times. Virtual fracture clinic has only just been implemented at the Homerton University Hospital and hopefully at the next audit we will be 100% compliant with the BOA BOAST 7 Guideline. We would recommend that virtual fracture clinics being rolled out in Orthopedic departments in all hospitals which have Orthopedic services

Objectives. To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a virtual fracture clinic (VFC) model, and supplement the literature regarding this service as recommended by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA). Methods. This was a retrospective study including all patients (17 116) referred to fracture clinics in a London District General Hospital from May 2013 to April 2016, using hospital-level data. We used interrupted time series analysis with segmented regression, and direct before-and-after comparison, to study the impact of VFCs introduced in December 2014 on six clinical parameters and on local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) spend. Student’s t-tests were used for direct comparison, whilst segmented regression was employed for projection analysis. Results. There were statistically significant reductions in numbers of new patients seen face-to-face (140.4, . sd. 39.6 versus 461.6, . sd. 61.63, p < 0.0001), days to first orthopaedic review (5.2, . sd. 0.66 versus 10.9, . sd. 1.5, p < 0.0001), discharges (33.5, . sd. 3.66 versus 129.2, . sd. 7.36, p < 0.0001) and non-attendees (14.82, . sd. 1.48 versus 60.47, . sd. 2.68, p < 0.0001), in addition to a statistically significant increase in number of patients seen within 72-hours (46.4% 3873 of 8345 versus 5.1% 447 of 8771, p < 0.0001). There was a non-significant increase in consultation time of 1 minute 9 seconds (14 minutes 53 seconds . sd. 106 seconds versus 13 minutes 44 seconds . sd. 128 seconds, p = 0.0878). VFC saved the local CCG £67 385.67 in the first year and is set to save £129 885.67 annually thereafter. Conclusions. We have shown VFCs are clinically and cost-effective, with improvement across several clinical performance parameters and substantial financial savings for CCGs. To our knowledge this is the largest study addressing clinical practice implications of VFCs in England, using robust methodology to adjust for pre-existing trends. Further studies are required to appreciate whether our results are reproducible with local variations in the VFC model and payment tariffs. Cite this article: A. McKirdy, A. M. Imbuldeniya. The clinical and cost effectiveness of a virtual fracture clinic service: An interrupted time series analysis and before-and-after comparison. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:–269. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.65.BJR-2017-0330.R1

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

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

In current practice in the UK there are three main approaches to investigating suspected scaphoid fractures not seen on initial plain film x-rays. Early MRI of all cases. Review all cases in clinic at two weeks with repeat x-rays. Hybrid model. Virtual Fracture Clinic (VFC) triage to reduce those who are seen in clinic at two weeks by:. ∘. Organising early MRI for those with high-risk presentation. ∘. Discharging those with an alternative more likely diagnosis. Our unit uses the VFC model. We aimed to evaluate its efficiency, safety, clinical outcomes and economic viability. All patients attending the emergency department with either a confirmed or suspected scaphoid fracture between March and December 2020 were included (n=305). Of these 297 were referred to the VFC: 33 had a confirmed fracture on x-ray and 264 had a suspected fracture. Of the suspected fractures reviewed in VFC 14% had an MRI organised directly owing to a high-risk presentation, 79% were brought for fracture clinic review and 17% discharged with an alternative diagnosis such as osteoarthritis. Of those subsequently reviewed in fracture clinic at two weeks: 9% were treated as scaphoid fractures (based on clinical suspicion and repeat x-rays), 17% had MRI or CT imaging organised, 5% did not attend and 69% were discharged. Overall, 17% of cases initially triaged, had further imaging – 41 MRIs and 5 CTs. MRI detected: 5% scaphoid fracture, 17% other fracture, 24% bone contusion, complete ligament tear 10%, partial ligament tear 39% and normal study 10%. The results of MRI minimally affected management. 3 patients were taken out of plaster early, 1 patient was immobilized who was not previously and no patients underwent operative management. In the following 12-month period one patient re-presented with a hand or wrist issue. This approach avoided 218 MRIs, equating to £24000 and 109 hours of scanner time. VFC triage and selective use of MRI scanning is a safe, efficient and cost-effective method for the management suspected scaphoid fractures. This can be implemented in units without the resource to MRI all suspected scaphoid fractures from the emergency department

Virtual Fracture Clinic (VFC) is a consultant-led orthopaedic trauma outpatient triage and management service. The use of VFC has recently become commonplace in the United Kingdom. It allows multiple referral sources to the orthopaedic team, with clinical information and imaging reviewed by a consultant in VFC who formulates an appropriate management plan with the patient contacted; either to attend clinic for consultation or discharged with advice over the phone. The VFC is more efficient than a traditionally delivered outpatient fracture clinic service. We have utilized VFC for 1 year at our hospital, East Kent University Hospital Foundation Trust (EKHUFT), and undertook a closed loop audit to evaluate the service and highlight potential areas of improvement. The Objective of the study was to identify whether the implementation of new re-designed VFC referral guidelines together with teaching set across one of the hospitals in EKHUFT improved the effectiveness and standards of VFC referrals. An initial audit was performed of all referrals made to VFC over a 2 weeks period in December 2018. Changes to the VFC referral pathway were implemented, and teaching sessions performed by the orthopaedic team to all referring units, including minor injury units (MIU) and the emergency department (ED). After implementation, re-audit of VFC referrals was performed in February 2019 over a similar 2 weeks period. Patient demographics, diagnosis and outcomes were collected from the online patient record with images reviewed using PACS software. Following intervention, referral rates dropped by 27.7% (136 vs 188 patients) over the 2 weeks periods. Patient demographics, injury type and severity remained the same between the 2 groups. 51.5% (70/136) did not meet VFC pathway criteria after the intervention and were considered inappropriate, compared to 70% in the original group. 15.4% (21/136) referrals could have been managed in the emergency department using the new guidelines and leaflet discharge. 5.1% (7/136) of the referrals should have been referred to orthopaedic on-call acutely and 22% (30/136) of the referrals had a soft tissue injury or no injury identified. This did not change between the 2 groups despite intervention. Referring MIU and ED units require continued support and teaching over a prolonged time period to hopefully see further improvements. Immediate hot reporting of radiographs may further benefit the service, but staffing and funding issues particularly out of hours, means this remains an aspiration

Abstract

The Coronavirus pandemic mandated an immediate and dramatic change in the delivery of acute trauma services to minimise face-to-face contact. In our hospital, patients presenting to the Emergency Department with a knee injury and no fracture seen on Xrays were referred to a “Virtual Fracture Clinic” (VFC) where Xrays and clinical notes were reviewed by the duty Trauma and Orthopaedic Consultant the following working day. We present the outcomes of 101 consecutive patients managed through this process and deemed to have a “Soft Tissue Knee Injury” with a minimum follow-up of six months.

All Xrays were reviewed by a sub-specialist knee surgeon blinded to notes or clinical outcomes. Electronic clinical records were reviewed to determine further clinical appointments, surgical treatment and pending interventions.

Of 101 patients, the knee surgeon diagnosed 1 Fracture, 4 Lipo-haemarthroses, 41 significant effusions and 55 patients with normal Xrays. Correlation to urgent surgery was 100% for fracture (1/1), 25% for Lipo-haemarthrosis (1/4), 7.3% for significant effusion (3/41) and 9.1% for normal Xrays (5/55). A further 9.8% (4/41) of the “effusion” group and 7.3% (4/55) of the “normal” group were subsequently listed for non-urgent surgery.

Overall 17% (7/41) of “effusion” patients and 16% (9/55) of “normal” patients required surgery. Management plans from VFC varied within groups.

Acute “soft-tissue” injuries of the knee in adults cannot be reliably managed via VFC based on X-ray findings. A staged review by an appropriately trained health professional could reduce demand on acute knee surgical clinics and may enhance patient outcomes.

Introduction. Virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) are being increasingly used to offer safe and efficient orthopaedic review without the requirement for face-to-face contact. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we sought to develop an online referral pathway that would allow us to provide definitive orthopaedic management plans and reduce face-to-face contact at the fracture clinics. Methods. All patients presenting to the emergency department from 21March 2020 with a musculoskeletal injury or potential musculoskeletal infection deemed to require orthopaedic input were discussed using a secure messaging app. A definitive management plan was communicated by an on-call senior orthopaedic decision-maker. We analyzed the time to decision, if further information was needed, and the referral outcome. An analysis of the orthopaedic referrals for the same period in 2019 was also performed as a comparison. Results. During the study period, 295 patients with mean age of 7.93 years (standard error (SE) 0.24) were reviewed. Of these, 25 (9.8%) were admitted, 17 (5.8%) were advised to return for planned surgical intervention, 105 (35.6%) were referred to a face-to-face fracture clinic, 137 (46.4%) were discharged with no follow-up, and seven (2.4%) were referred to other services. The mean time to decision was 20.14 minutes (SE 1.73). There was a significant difference in the time to decision between patients referred to fracture clinic and patients discharged (mean 25.25 minutes (SE 3.18) vs mean 2.63 (SE 1.42); p < 0.005). There were a total of 295 referrals to the fracture clinic for the same period in 2019 with a further 44 emergency admissions. There was a statistically significant difference in the weekly referrals after being triaged by the VFC (mean 59 (SE 5.15) vs mean 21 (SE 2.17); p < 0.001). Conclusion. The use of an electronic referral pathway to deliver a point of care virtual fracture clinic allowed for efficient use of scarce resources and definitive management plan delivery in a safe manner. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:293–301

Aims. Occult (clinical) injuries represent 15% of all scaphoid fractures, posing significant challenges to the clinician. MRI has been suggested as the gold standard for diagnosis, but remains expensive, time-consuming, and is in high demand. Conventional management with immobilization and serial radiography typically results in multiple follow-up attendances to clinic, radiation exposure, and delays return to work. Suboptimal management can result in significant disability and, frequently, litigation. Methods. We present a service evaluation report following the introduction of a quality-improvement themed, streamlined, clinical scaphoid pathway. Patients are offered a removable wrist splint with verbal and written instructions to remove it two weeks following injury, for self-assessment. The persistence of pain is the patient’s guide to ‘opt-in’ and to self-refer for a follow-up appointment with a senior emergency physician. On confirmation of ongoing signs of clinical scaphoid injury, an urgent outpatient ‘fast’-wrist protocol MRI scan is ordered, with instructions to maintain wrist immobilization. Patients with positive scan results are referred for specialist orthopaedic assessment via a virtual fracture clinic. Results. From February 2018 to January 2019, there were 442 patients diagnosed as clinical scaphoid fractures. 122 patients (28%) self-referred back to the emergency department at two weeks. Following clinical review, 53 patients were discharged; MRI was booked for 69 patients (16%). Overall, six patients (< 2% of total; 10% of those scanned) had positive scans for a scaphoid fracture. There were no known missed fractures, long-term non-unions or malunions resulting from this pathway. Costs were saved by avoiding face-to-face clinical review and MRI scanning. Conclusion. A patient-focused opt-in approach is safe and effective to managing the suspected occult (clinical) scaphoid fracture. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(2):117–122

Aims. The underlying natural history of suspected scaphoid fractures (SSFs) is unclear and assumed poor. There is an urgent requirement to develop the literature around SSFs to quantify the actual prevalence of intervention following SSF. Defining the risk of intervention following SSF may influence the need for widespread surveillance and screening of SSF injuries, and could influence medicolegal actions around missed scaphoid fractures. Methods. Data on SSF were retrospectively gathered from virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) across a large Scottish Health Board over a four-year period, from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021. The Bluespier Electronic Patient Record System identified any surgical procedure being undertaken in relation to a scaphoid injury over the same time period. Isolating patients who underwent surgical intervention for SSF was performed by cross-referencing the unique patient Community Health Index number for patients who underwent these scaphoid procedures with those seen at VFCs for SSF over this four-year period. Results. In total, 1,739 patients were identified as having had a SSF. Five patients (0.28%) underwent early open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). One patient (0.06%) developed a nonunion and underwent ORIF with bone grafting. All six patients undergoing surgery were male (p = 0.005). The overall rate of intervention following a SSF was 0.35%. The early intervention rate in those undergoing primary MRI was one (0.36%), compared with three in those without (0.27%) (p > 0.576). Conclusion. Surgical intervention was rare following a SSF and was not required in females. A primary MRI policy did not appear to be associated with any change in primary or secondary intervention. These data are the first and largest in recent literature to quantify the prevalence of surgical intervention following a SSF, and may be used to guide surveillance and screening pathways as well as define medicolegal risk involved in missing a true fracture in SSFs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):312–316

Aims. We introduced a self-care pathway for minimally displaced distal radius fractures, which involved the patient being discharged from a Virtual Fracture Clinic (VFC) without a physical review and being provided with written instructions on how to remove their own cast or splint at home, plus advice on exercises and return to function. Methods. All patients managed via this protocol between March and October 2020 were contacted by a medical secretary at a minimum of six months post-injury. The patients were asked to complete the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), a satisfaction questionnaire, advise if they had required surgery and/or contacted any health professional, and were also asked for any recommendations on how to improve the service. A review with a hand surgeon was organized if required, and a cost analysis was also conducted. Results. Overall 71/101 patients completed the telephone consultation; no patients required surgery, and the mean and median PRWE scores were 23.9/100 (SD 24.9) and 17.0/100 (interquartile range (IQR) 0 to 40), respectively. Mean patient satisfaction with treatment was 34.3/40 (SD 9.2), and 65 patients (92%) were satisfied or highly satisfied. In total there were 16 contact calls, 12 requests for a consultant review, no formal complaints, and 15 minor adjustment suggestions to improve patient experience. A relationship was found between intra-articular injuries and lower patient satisfaction scores (p = 0.025), however no relationship was found between PRWE scores and the nature of the fracture. Also, no relationship was found between the type of immobilization and the functional outcome or patient satisfaction. Cost analysis of the self-care pathway V traditional pathway showed a cost savings of over £13,500 per year with the new self-care model compared to the traditional model. Conclusion. Our study supports a VFC self-care pathway for patients with minimally displaced distal radius fractures. The pathway provides a good level of patient satisfaction and function. To improve the service, we will make minor amendments to our patient information sheet. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(9):726–732

Stable Weber B fractures are typically treated non-operatively without complications but require close monitoring due to concerns over potential medial deltoid ligament injuries and the risk of delayed talar shift. Following recent evidence suggesting this is unlikely, a functional protocol with early weight bearing was introduced at Glasgow Royal Infirmary (GRI) following a pilot audit. This study aims to evaluate the risk of delayed talar shift in isolated Weber B fractures managed with functional bracing and early weight-bearing, particularly if signs of medial ligament injury are present. We conducted a retrospective review of 148 patients with isolated Weber B fractures without talar shift at presentation that were reviewed at the virtual fracture clinic at our institution between July 2019 and June 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of delayed talar shift. Secondary outcomes were other complications and adherence to protocol. 48 patients had medial signs present and of these 1 (2%) showed possible talar shift on X-rays at 4 weeks, and was kept under review. This patient had a normal medial clear space at 3 months. No patients with medial signs not documented (n=19) or not present (n=81) had delayed talar shift. 10% of patients (n=15) had at least 1 complication: delayed union (n=2); non-union (n=3); ongoing pain (n=14). Functional bracing with early weight-bearing is a safe, effective protocol for managing isolated Weber B fractures without initial talar shift. This study concludes that the risk of delayed talar shift is low in all patients, with or without medial signs

Introduction. Treatment pathways of 5. th. metatarsal fractures are commonly directed based on fracture classification, with Jones types for example, requiring closer observation and possibly more aggressive management. Primary objective. To investigate the reliability of assessment of subtypes of 5. th. metatarsal fractures by different observers. Methods. Patients were identified from our prospectively collected database. We included all patient referred to our virtual fracture clinic with a suspected or confirmed 5. th. metatarsal fracture. Plain AP radiographs were reviewed by two observers, who were initially trained on the 5. th. metatarsal classification identification. Zones were defined as Zone 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2, 3, diaphyseal shaft (DS), distal metaphysis (DM) and head. An inter-observer reliability analysis using Cohen's Kappa coefficient was carried out, and degree of observer agreement described using Landis & Koch's description. All data was analysed using IBM SPSS v.27. Results. 878 patients were identified. The two observers had moderate agreement when identifying fractures in all zones, apart from metatarsal head fractures, which scored substantial agreement (K=.614). Zones 1.1 (K=.582), 2 (K=.536), 3 (K=.601) and DS (K=.544) all tended towards but did not achieve substantial agreement. Whilst DS fractures achieved moderate agreement, there was an apparent difficulty with distal DS, resulting in a lot of cross over with DM (DS 210 vs 109; DM 76 vs 161). Slight agreement with the next highest adjacent zone was found when injuries were thought to be in zones 1.2, 1.3 and 2 (K=0.17, 0.115 and 0.152 respectively). Conclusions. Reliability of sub-categorising 5. th. metatarsal fractures using standardised instructions conveys moderate to substantial agreement in most cases. If the region of the fracture is going to be used in an algorithm to guide a management plan and clinical follow up during a virtual clinic review, defining fractures of zones 1–3 needs careful consideration

The Trauma Triage clinic (TTC) is a Virtual Fracture clinic which permits the direct discharge of simple, isolated fractures from the Emergency Department (ED), with consultant review of the clinical notes and radiographs. This study details the outcomes of patients with such injuries over a four-year period. All TTC records between January 2014 and December 2017 were collated from a prospective database. Fractures of the radial head, little finger metacarpal, fifth metatarsal, toe phalanges and soft tissue mallet finger injuries were included. Application of the direct discharge protocol, and any deviations were noted. All records were then re-assessed at a minimum of three years after TTC triage (mean 4.5 years) to ascertain which injuries re-attended the trauma clinic, reasons for re-attendance, source of referral and any subsequent surgical procedures. 6709 patients with fractures of the radial head (1882), little finger metacarpal (1621), fifth metatarsal (1916), toe phalanges (920) and soft tissue mallet finger injures (370) were identified. 963 (14%) patients were offered in-person review after TTC, of which 45 (0.6%) underwent a surgical intervention. 299 (4%) re-attended after TTC direct discharge at a mean time after injury of 11.9 weeks and 12 (0.2%) underwent surgical intervention. Serious interventions, defined as those in which a surgical procedure may have been avoided if the patient had not undergone direct discharge, occurred in 1 patient (0.01%). Re-intervention after direct discharge of simple injuries of the elbow, hand and foot is low. Unnecessary deviations from protocol offer avenues to optimise consumption of service resources

Objectives. “Virtual fracture clinics” have been reported as a safe and effective alternative to the traditional fracture clinic. Robust protocols are used to identify cases that do not require further review, with the remainder triaged to the most appropriate subspecialist at the optimum time for review. The objective of this study was to perform a “top-down” analysis of the cost effectiveness of this virtual fracture clinic pathway. Methods. National Health Service financial returns relating to our institution were examined for the time period 2009 to 2014 which spanned the service redesign. Results. The total staffing costs rose by 4% over the time period (from £1 744 933 to £1 811 301) compared with a national increase of 16%. The total outpatient department rate of attendance fell by 15% compared with a national fall of 5%. Had our local costs increased in line with the national average, an excess expenditure of £212 705 would have been required for staffing costs. Conclusions. The virtual fracture clinic system was associated with less overall use of staff resources in comparison to national cost data. Adoption of this system nationally may have the potential to achieve significant cost savings. Cite this article: P. J. Jenkins. Fracture clinic redesign reduces the cost of outpatient orthopaedic trauma care. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:33–36. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.52.2000506

Weber A fractures are a sub-group of ankle fractures parallel or distal to the joint line, below the level of the syndesmosis. Most stable Weber A fractures are managed conservatively with no significant difference in outcome vs. surgical intervention. 1,2. In an effort to ensure staff time was being used as efficiently as possible, a consultant-led virtual fracture clinic (VFC) was introduced to manage Weber A fractures. Patients not requiring immediate surgery were reviewed remotely and, wherever possible, were ‘virtually discharged’ to a nurse-led telephone line. Those with diagnostic uncertainty, unusual features or delayed recovery received a face to face review from a nurse or surgeon. To examine how patients were allocated under this protocol, along with overall patient satisfaction and functional outcome. An audit of satisfaction and outcome was performed of all patients who presented with a Weber A fracture to the ED between October 2011 and October 2012. The minimum follow-up period was two years. A satisfaction and patient reported outcome (5-level-likert-scale, EQ-5D, MOXFQ) measure was conducted via telephone. 3,4. After exclusions, 79 patients were left, of which 63 were successfully contacted (80%). Of the 79 patients included, 33 (42%) required early face-to-face review while 46 (58%) were discharged with advice following discussion at the VFC. Of the 63 successfully contacted, receipt of the information leaflet was recalled by 61 (97%) and 54 (86%) were satisfied with the information they had received. There was no difference in patient satisfaction regarding recovery (p=0.079) or treatment information (p=0.236) provided between avulsion and transverse fractures or in functional outcome according to MOXFQ (p=0.626) or EQ-Vas (p=0.915) scores. Patient satisfaction can remain high without face-to-face consultations following injury. This was demonstrated by the high satisfaction with recovery (83%) and with information provided (86%) and is consistent with current published literature and similar to what would have been achieved with traditional fracture clinic review. 5. The new protocol reduces unnecessary hospital attendances for patients and reduces the burden of unnecessary review in orthopaedic departments. Only 15% of patients required review at a traditional fracture clinic and 27% at a nurse-led clinic, freeing resources for more complex cases

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the introduction of a virtual pathway for the management of patients with a suspected fracture of the scaphoid, and to report patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and satisfaction following treatment using this service.

Telehealth has the potential to change the way we approach patient care. From virtual consenting to reducing carbon emissions, costs, and waiting times, it is a powerful tool in our clinical armamentarium. There is mounting evidence that remote diagnostic evaluation and decision-making have reached an acceptable level of accuracy and can safely be adopted in orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, patients’ and surgeons’ satisfaction with virtual appointments are comparable to in-person consultations. Challenges to the widespread use of telehealth should, however, be acknowledged and include the cost of installation, training, maintenance, and accessibility. It is also vital that clinicians are conscious of the medicolegal and ethical considerations surrounding the medium and adhere strictly to the relevant data protection legislation and storage framework. It remains to be seen how organizations harness the full spectrum of the technology to facilitate effective patient care.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):843–849.