Weightbearing instructions after musculoskeletal injury or orthopaedic surgery are a key aspect of the rehabilitation pathway and prescription. The terminology used to describe the weightbearing status of the patient is variable; many different terms are used, and there is recognition and evidence that the lack of standardized terminology contributes to confusion in practice. A consensus exercise was conducted involving all the major stakeholders in the patient journey for those with musculoskeletal injury. The consensus exercise primary aim was to seek agreement on a standardized set of terminology for weightbearing instructions.Aims
Methods
In 2017, the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery engaged the profession and all relevant stakeholders in two formal research prioritization processes. In this editorial, we describe the impact of this prioritization on funding, and how research in
A national screening programme has existed in the UK for the diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) since 1969. However, every aspect of screening and treatment remains controversial. Screening programmes throughout the world vary enormously, and in the UK there is significant variation in screening practice and treatment pathways. We report the results of an attempt by the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery (BSCOS) to identify a nationwide consensus for the management of DDH in order to unify treatment and suggest an approach for screening. A Delphi consensus study was performed among the membership of BSCOS. Statements were generated by a steering group regarding aspects of the management of DDH in children aged under three months, namely screening and surveillance (15 questions), the technique of ultrasound scanning (eight questions), the initiation of treatment (19 questions), care during treatment with a splint (ten questions), and on quality, governance, and research (eight questions). A two-round Delphi process was used and a consensus document was produced at the final meeting of the steering group.Aims
Methods
This study evaluates the quality of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) reported in childhood fracture trials and recommends outcome measures to assess and report physical function, functional capacity, and quality of life using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) standards. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of OVID Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed to identify all PROMs reported in trials. A search of OVID Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO was performed to identify all PROMs with validation studies in childhood fractures. Development studies were identified through hand-searching. Data extraction was undertaken by two reviewers. Study quality and risk of bias was evaluated by COSMIN guidelines and recorded on standardized checklists.Aims
Methods
Aims. High-quality clinical research in children’s orthopaedic surgery
has lagged behind other surgical subspecialties. This study used
a consensus-based approach to identify research priorities for clinical
trials in
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
The FRCS (Tr &
Orth) examination has three components: MCQs, Vivas and Clinical Examination. The Vivas are further divided into four sections comprising Basic Science, Adult Pathology, Hands and
