Many of the questionnaire based scoring systems (i.e. Rowe score) require some form of clinical assessment. These clinical components can be very difficult to perform on a large scale particularly when a patient lives a long distance from clinic. We have attempted to counter this problem by asking the patient to asses their own range of motion. The aim of this study was to test the agreement between patient and clinician measured shoulder external rotation range using a photo based self-assessment tool.

Fifty-one professional and semi-professional rugby players were recruited to assess shoulder external rotation range. Each player was presented with a photo based shoulder external rotation range self-assessment tool, which featured four photos of progressive shoulder external rotation in 2 positions, 900 abduction (150, 300, 450 & 600 of external rotation) and 00 abduction (700, 800, 900 & 1000 of external rotation). The players were asked to perform active external rotation in these two positions and mark the image which best matched their maximal external rotation. The player was then independently assessed using the same tool, by a clinician.

The difference between the player's and the clinician's assessment was analysed using a weighted Kappa test. The Kappa for the shoulder external rotation in 900 abduction was 0.75 and 0.71 for left and right respectively, and 0.57 and 0.55 for shoulder external rotation in 00 abduction. Thus, the strength of agreement between the player's and clinician's assessment of shoulder external rotation is good in 900 abduction and moderate in 00 abduction.

These results demonstrate that the photo-based shoulder external rotation range self-assessment tool is a very useful addition to researchers' and clinicians' toolkits and may be most useful when a patient lives a great distance from/or is unable to attend a clinic.

After meniscetomy there is an increased risk of tibiofemoral arthritis. In recent times there has been an increased emphasis on preservation of healthy meniscal tissue. When this cannot be achieved some patients may benefit from allograft transplantation. This aims to restore meniscal function and so limit pain and the development of arthritis. This is an evolving area with controversy surrounding patient selection, tissue harvesting and sterilisation, longterm outcome and overall efficacy.

Twenty-eight patients have undergone 30 meniscal transplants beginning in 2001. All transplants have been performed by the senior author. The mean age at surgery was 37.7 years (range 20–51), there were 16 males and 12 females. At the time of the index operation nine patients underwent additional procedures on the same knee. All patients are scored using recognised knee scoring systems including the Oxford, IKDC and Lysholm scores. All patients are being followed up regularly with clinical assessment and repeat scores.

To date the average follow up is 34.3 months (range 6–84). There have been 12 patients requiring further arthroscopy (three with complete meniscal transplant failure). The average increases in Lysholm, Oxford and IKDC scores were 10.7, 7.6 and 8.6 respectively.

Lack of donors is the current limitation to performing transplants in Brisbane. 61 patients are currently awaiting suitable menisci and in the last 12 months there have been only three donors. A national registry may address this issue but raises problems related to uniform retrieval, storage, sizing and availability. Early results are encouraging with the majority of patients experiencing pain relief and improvement of function over time.