Aims. This study aimed to develop a virtual clinic for the purpose of reducing face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. Patients and Methods. Anonymized experts (hip and knee arthroplasty patients, surgeons, physiotherapists, radiologists, and arthroplasty practitioners) gave feedback via a Delphi Consensus Technique. This consisted of an iterative sequence of online surveys, during which virtual documents, made up of a patient-reported questionnaire, standardized radiology report, and decision-guiding algorithm, were modified until consensus was achieved. We tested the patient-reported questionnaire on seven patients in orthopaedic clinics using a ‘think-aloud’ process to capture difficulties with its completion. Results. A patient-reported 13-item questionnaire was developed covering pain, mobility, and activity. The radiology report included up to ten items (e.g. progressive periprosthetic bone loss) depending on the type of arthroplasty. The algorithm concludes in one of three outcomes: review at surgeon’s discretion (three to 12 months); see at next available clinic; or long-term follow-up/discharge. Conclusion. The virtual clinic approach with attendant documents achieved consensus by orthopaedic experts, radiologists, and patients. The robust development and testing of this standardized virtual clinic provided a sound platform for organizations in the United Kingdom to adopt a virtual clinic approach for follow-up of hip and knee arthroplasty patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:951–959

Aims. Fracture clinics are often characterised by the referral of large numbers of unselected patients with minor injuries not requiring investigation or intervention, long waiting times and recurrent unnecessary reviews. Our experience had been of an unsustainable system and we implemented a ‘Trauma Triage Clinic’ (TTC) in order to rationalise and regulate access to our fracture service. The British Orthopaedic Association’s guidelines have required a prospective evaluation of this change of practice, and we report our experience and results. Patients and Methods. We review the management of all 12 069 patients referred to our service in the calendar year 2014, with a minimum of one year follow-up during the calendar year 2015. . Results. Following the successful introduction of the TTC, only 2836 patients (23.5%) who would previously have been reviewed in the general fracture clinic were brought back to such a clinic to be seen by a surgeon. An additional 2366 patients (19.6%) were brought back to a sub-specialist injury-specific clinic. Another 2776 patients (23%) with relatively predictable injuries were reviewed by a nurse practitioner according to an established protocol or specific consultant instructions. A further 3222 patients (26.7%) were discharged from the service without attending the clinic. No significant errors or omissions occurred with the introduction of the TTC. Conclusion. We have found that our TTC allows large numbers of referrals to be reviewed and triaged safely and effectively, to the benefit and satisfaction of patients, consultants, trainees, staff and the organisation. This paper provides the first large-scale review of the instigation of a TTC, and its effect, acceptability and safety. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:503–7

Cell therapies hold significant promise for the treatment of injured or diseased musculoskeletal tissues. However, despite advances in research, there is growing concern about the increasing number of clinical centres around the world that are making unwarranted claims or are performing risky biological procedures. Such providers have been known to recommend, prescribe, or deliver so called ‘stem cell’ preparations without sufficient data to support their true content and efficacy. In this annotation, we outline the current environment of stem cell-based treatments and the strategies of marketing directly to consumers. We also outline the difficulties in the regulation of these clinics and make recommendations for best practice and the identification and reporting of illegitimate providers. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(2):148–154

The strain on clinic and surgeon resources resulting from a rise in demand for total knee replacement (TKR) requires reconsideration of when and how often patients need to be seen for follow-up. Surgeons will otherwise require increased paramedical staff or need to limit the number of TKRs they undertake. We reviewed the outcome data of 16 414 primary TKRs undertaken at our centre to determine the time to re-operation for any reason and for specific failure mechanisms. Peak risk years for failure were determined by comparing the conditional probability of failure, the number of failures divided by the total number of TKRs cases, for each year. The median times to failure for the most common failure mechanisms were 4.9 years (interquartile range (IQR) 1.7 to 10.7) for femoral and tibial loosening, 1.9 years (IQR 0.8 to 3.9) for infection, 3.1 years (IQR 1.6 to 5.5) for tibial collapse and 5.6 years (IQR 3.4 to 9.3) for instability. The median time to failure for all revisions was 3.3 years (IQR 1.2 to 8.5), with an overall revision rate of 1.7% (n = 282). Results from our patient population suggest that patients be seen for follow-up at six months, one year, three years, eight years, 12 years, and every five years thereafter. Patients with higher pain in the early post-operative period or high body mass index (≥ 41 kg/m. 2. ) should be monitored more closely. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1484–9

For clinical, psychological and social reasons the diagnosis of Duchenne muscular dystrophy should be established as early as possible. In a survey of 83 families with 93 affected boys, the diagnosis was missed in every case referred to an orthopaedic surgeon (37 patients). In the whole group there was a mean delay of 2.0 years (0 to 6 years) during which time inappropriate treatment, difficulties in communication with parents, much parental anxiety and further pregnancies occurred. A serum creatine kinase estimation is a simple outpatient test which should be carried out on any boy with clumsy or abnormal gait, with flat feet or with an unexplained equinus deformity.