Classifying trochlear dysplasia (TD) is useful to determine the treatment options for patients suffering from patellofemoral instability (PFI). There is no consensus on which classification system is more reliable and reproducible for this purpose to guide clinicians in order to treat PFI. There are also concerns about validity of the Dejour classification (DJC), which is the most widely used classification for TD, having only a fair reliability score.

The Oswestry-Bristol classification (OBC) is a recently proposed system of classification of TD and the authors report a fair-to-good interobserver agreement and good-to-excellent intra-observer agreement in the assessment of TD. The aim of this study was to compare the reliability and reproducibility of these two classifications.

6 assessors (4 consultants and 2 registrars) independently evaluated 100 magnetic resonance axial images of the patella-femoral joint for TD and classified them according to OBC and DJC. These assessments were again repeated by all raters after 4 weeks. The inter and intra-observer reliability scores were calculated using Cohen's kappa and Cronbach's alpha.

Both classifications showed good to excellent interobserver reliability with high alpha scores. The OBC classification showed a substantial intra-observer agreement (mean kappa 0.628)[p<0.005] whereas the DJC showed a moderate agreement (mean kappa 0.572) [p<0.005]. There was no significant difference in the kappa values when comparing the assessments by consultants to those by registrars, in either classification systems.

This large study from a non-founding institute shows both classification systems to be reliable for classifying TD based on magnetic resonance axial images of the patella-femoral joint, with the simple to use OBC having a higher intra-observer reliability score compared to the DJC.

The significance of ring-fencing orthopaedic beds and protected elective sites have recently been highlighted by the British Orthopaedic Association & Royal College of Surgeons. During the pandemic many such elective setups were established with various degrees of success. This study aimed to compare the functioning and efficiency of a Orthopaedic Protected Elective Surgical Unit (PESU) instituted during the pandemic with the pre-pandemic elective service at our hospital (Pre-Pandemic ward or PPW).

We retrospectively collected data of all patients who underwent elective Orthopaedic procedures in a protected elective unit during the pandemic (March 2020 – July 2020) and a similar cohort of patients operated via the routine elective service immediately prior to the pandemic (October 2019 – February 2020). Various parameters were compared and analysed. To minimise the effect of confounding factors a secondary analysis was undertaken comparing total hip replacements (THR) by a single surgeon via PESU (PESU-THR) and PPW (PPW-THR) over 5 months each from March-July 2021 and March-July 2019 respectively.

A total of 192 cases were listed on PESU during the studied period whereas this number was 339 for PPW. However more than half (52%) of those listed for a surgery on PPW were cancelled and only 162 cases (48%) were actually performed. PESU had a significantly better conversion rate with only 12.5% being cancelled and 168 (87.5%) cases performed. 49% (87 out of 177) of the cases cancelled on PPW were due to a ‘bed unavailability’. A further 17% (30/177) and 16% (28/177) were cancelled due to ‘emergency case prioritisation’ and ‘patient deemed unfit’ respectively. In contrast only 3 out of the 24 patients cancelled on PESU were due to bed unavailability and the main reason for cancellation here was ‘patient deemed unfit’ (9/24). Single surgeon THR, showed similar demographic features for the 25 patients on PESU and 37 patients on PPW. The average age for these patients was 63 on PESU and 69 on PPW whereas the BMI was 33 and 30 respectively. The patients on PESU also demonstrated a decrease in length of hospital stay with an average of 3 days in comparison to 4.8 days for those admitted to PPW. PROMS scores were comparable at 6 weeks with an average improvement of 16.4/48 in the PESU-THR cohort and of 18.8/48 in the PPW-THR cohort. There were no readmissions or revisions recorded in the PESU-THR cohort while the PPW-THR cohort had 1 readmission and revision.

Our study shows how a small ring fenced Orthopaedic elective unit in a district general hospital, even during a global pandemic, can function more efficiently than a routine elective facility with many shared services.

Aims

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the provision of orthopaedic care across the UK. During the pandemic orthopaedic specialist registrars were redeployed to “frontline” specialties occupying non-surgical roles. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic training in the UK is unknown. This paper sought to examine the role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on postgraduate orthopaedic education.

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.