First Metatarsophalangeal joint fusion has been successfully used to treat Hallux rigidus. We have attempted to evaluate commonly used methods of fixation and joint preparation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the single largest comparative study on first MTPJ fusion. We aimed to evaluate the radiological union and revision rates. We included 409 consecutive MTPJ fusions performed in 385 patients. We collected demographic, comorbidities and complication data. We evaluated the radiographs for the status of the union. Logistic regression was used to calculate the Odds ratio (OR) of non-union for the collected variables. Our union rate was 91.4% (34/409). 29.4% of our non-unions were symptomatic (10/34). Hallux valgus showed a statistically significant relation to non-union (Odds ratio 9.33, p-value 0.017). Other potential contributing factors like sex (OR1.9, p-value 0.44), diabetes (OR 0, p-value 0.99), steroid use (OR 2.07, p-value 0.44), inflammatory arthritis (OR 0, p-value 0.99) and smoking (OR 2.69, p-value 0.34) did not attain statistical significance. Further, the methods of fixation like solid screws (OR 0, p-value 0.99), plate (OR 3.6, p-value 0.187) or cannulated screws (OR 0.09, p-value 0.06) showed no correlation with non-union. We compared two techniques of joint preparation and found no significant difference in union rates (Chi-Square 1.0426, p-value 0.30). Our crude cost comparison showed the average saving to the trust per year could be 33,442.50£ by choosing screws over plate. Only Hallux Valgus had a statistically significant relation to non-union. Solid screw could be economically the most viable option and a valid alternative.
Bowel management following joint replacement is often neglected leading lot of patient distress, with the advent of the enhanced orthopedic rehabilitation program, there is a need of a guideline to ensure prompt and quick recovery of bowel habits before discharge. Our aim was to identify the incidence of constipation in joint replacement patients, to evaluate the current practice of bowel management and formulate a protocol for management of constipation to improve the practice. We conducted a prospective study of 50 patients who underwent joint replacement procedures at our institute between September and October 2015. Following initial audit, we formulated a protocol for bowel management, and performed a re-audit by collecting a prospective data of 50 patients. The statistical analysis was done and calculating the mean and standard deviation for continuous variable and Fischer's exact test was used and significance level was set at 0.05. Incidence of constipation was 88% and laxatives were prescribed in 42%. More importantly, there was no correlation between constipation and pre operative fasting (p Value 0.33), post operative fasting (p Value 0.1822), type of surgery (p value 1.00) and type of anaesthesia (p Value 0.27). Following introduction of bowel protocol the laxative prescription increased to 98% (Prophylactic in 81%), consequently the incidence of constipation reduced to 18%. Implementing bowel protocol significantly will improve the patient care and reduce the rate of complications.
Our aim was to compare the biomechanical strength modified side-to-side repair with modified pulvertaft technique keeping overlap length, anchor points, type of suture, suture throw and amount of suture similar. In our study, we have used turkey tendons. Two investigators performed 34 repairs during one summer month. All mechanical testing was carried out using the tensile load testing machine. Variables measured were maximum load, load to first failure, modulus, load at break, mode of failure, site of failure, tensile strain, and tensile stress. The statistical comparison was carried by Levene's test and T test for means. The mean maximum load tolerated by modified side-to-side repair was 50.3N(S.D13.7) and that by modified pulvertaft 46.96N(S.D: 16.4), overall it was 48.29 N (S.D: 14.57). The tensile stress at maximum load for modified pulvertaft and modified side-to-side repair was 4.2MPa(S.D: 3.1) and 4.7 MPa (S.D: 3.8) respectively {Overall 4.3MPa(S.D: 3.5)}. The tensile stress at yield was 4.01 MPa (S.D: 3.1) and 5.5 MPa (S.D: 3.7) respectively for modified pulvertaft and modified side-to-side repair {overall 4.44 MPa (S.D: 3.45)}. The tensile strain at maximum load respectively for side-to-side and modified pulvertaft repair was 7.87%(S.D: 33.3) and 7.84%(S.D: 34.02) respectively. We found no statistical difference between 2 repairs in terms of strength, load to first failure, and maximum load to failure. The suture cut through was the commonest mode of failure. Our study uniquely compares two techniques under standard conditions, and contrary to existing evidence found no difference.
