Aims

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are complex procedures with higher rates of re-revision, complications, and mortality compared to primary TKA and THA. We report the effects of the establishment of a revision arthroplasty network (the East Midlands Specialist Orthopaedic Network; EMSON) on outcomes of rTKA and rTHA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(6):590–592.

Hip fracture is a common injury associated with high mortality, long-term disability and huge socio-economic burden. Yet there has been relatively little research into best treatment, and evidence that has been generated has often been criticised for its poor quality. Here, we discuss the advances made towards overcoming these criticisms and the future directions for hip fracture research: how co-ordinating existing national infrastructures and use of now established clinical research networks will likely go some way towards overcoming the practical and financial challenges of conducting large trials. We highlight the importance of large collaborative pragmatic trials to inform decision/policy makers and the progress made towards reaching a consensus on a core outcome set to facilitate data pooling for evidence synthesis and meta-analysis. . These advances and future directions are a priority in order to establish the high-quality evidence base required for this important group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:875–9

Episodic, or bundled payments, is a concept now familiar to most in the healthcare arena, but the models are often misunderstood. Under a traditional fee-for-service model, each provider bills separately for their services which creates financial incentives to maximise volumes. Under a bundled payment, a single entity, often referred to as a convener (maybe the hospital, the physician group, or a third party) assumes the risk through a payer contract for all services provided within a defined episode of care, and receives a single (bundled) payment for all services provided for that episode. The time frame around the intervention is variable, but defined in advance, as are included and excluded costs. Timing of the actual payment in a bundle may either be before the episode occurs (prospective payment model), or after the end of the episode through a reconciliation (retrospective payment model). In either case, the defined costs over the defined time frame are borne by the convener.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1280–5.

Trauma and orthopaedics is the largest of the surgical specialties and yet attracts a disproportionately small fraction of available national and international funding for health research. With the burden of musculoskeletal disease increasing, high-quality research is required to improve the evidence base for orthopaedic practice. Using the current research landscape in the United Kingdom as an example, but also addressing the international perspective, we highlight the issues surrounding poor levels of research funding in trauma and orthopaedics and indicate avenues for improving the impact and success of surgical musculoskeletal research.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1578–85.

We have reviewed the data from our regional Bone Tumour Registry on patients with osteosarcoma diagnosed between 1933 and 2004 in order to investigate the relationship between survival and changes in treatment. There were 184 patients with non-metastatic appendicular osteosarcoma diagnosed at the age of 18 or under. Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves, and multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox regression proportional hazards model.

The five-year survival improved from 21% between 1933 and 1959, to 62% between 1990 and 1999. During this time, a multi-disciplinary organisation was gradually developed to manage treatment. The most significant variable affecting outcome was the date of diagnosis, with trends in improved survival mirroring the introduction of increasingly effective chemotherapy. Our experience suggests that the guidelines of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence on the minimum throughput of centres for treatment should be enforced flexibly in those that can demonstrate that their historical and contemporary results are comparable to those published nationally and internationally.