Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 25
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 6 | Pages 1007 - 1008
1 Jun 2021
Johansen A Inman DS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 6 | Pages 590 - 592
1 Jun 2023
Manktelow ARJ Mitchell P Haddad FS

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


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 3 | Pages 220 - 223
1 Mar 2024
Kayani B Luo TD Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 9 | Pages 879 - 883
1 Sep 2024
Kayani B Staats K Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1009 - 1010
1 Sep 2022
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 4 | Pages 413 - 415
1 Apr 2022
Hamilton LC Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 4 | Pages 597 - 599
1 Apr 2021
Kader DF Oussedik S Kader N Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1469 - 1471
1 Dec 2019
Haddad FS Horriat S


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 3 | Pages 236 - 237
1 Mar 2019
Perry DC Paton RW



The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 7 | Pages 829 - 830
1 Jul 2018
Callaghan JJ Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 2 | Pages 147 - 150
1 Feb 2017
Costa ML Tutton E Achten J Grant R Slowther AM

Traditionally, informed consent for clinical research involves the patient reading an approved Participant Information Sheet, considering the information presented and having as much time as they need to discuss the study information with their friends and relatives, their clinical care and the research teams. This system works well in the ‘planned’ or ‘elective’ setting. But what happens if the patient requires urgent treatment for an injury or emergency?

This article reviews the legal framework which governs informed consent in the emergency setting, discusses how the approach taken may vary according to the details of the emergency and the treatment required, and reports on the patients’ view of providing consent following a serious injury. We then provide some practical tips for managing the process of informed consent in the context of injuries and emergencies.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:147–150.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 7 | Pages 871 - 874
1 Jul 2015
Breakwell LM Cole AA Birch N Heywood C

The effective capture of outcome measures in the healthcare setting can be traced back to Florence Nightingale’s investigation of the in-patient mortality of soldiers wounded in the Crimean war in the 1850s.

Only relatively recently has the formalised collection of outcomes data into Registries been recognised as valuable in itself.

With the advent of surgeon league tables and a move towards value based health care, individuals are being driven to collect, store and interpret data.

Following the success of the National Joint Registry, the British Association of Spine Surgeons instituted the British Spine Registry. Since its launch in 2012, over 650 users representing the whole surgical team have registered and during this time, more than 27 000 patients have been entered onto the database.

There has been significant publicity regarding the collection of outcome measures after surgery, including patient-reported scores. Over 12 000 forms have been directly entered by patients themselves, with many more entered by the surgical teams.

Questions abound: who should have access to the data produced by the Registry and how should they use it? How should the results be reported and in what forum?

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:871–4.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1425 - 1426
1 Nov 2016
Reed M Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1297 - 1298
1 Oct 2016
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1427 - 1430
1 Nov 2016
Powell JM Rai A Foy M Casey A Dabke H Gibson A Hutton M

Many hospitals do not have a structured process of consent, the attainment of which can often be rather ‘last-minute’ and somewhat chaotic. This is a surprising state of affairs as spinal surgery is a high-risk surgical specialty with potential for expensive litigation claims. More recently, the Montgomery ruling by the United Kingdom Supreme Court has placed the subject of informed consent into the spotlight.

There is a paucity of practical guidance on how a consent process can be achieved in a busy clinical setting. The British Association of Spinal Surgeons (BASS) has convened a working party to address this need. To our knowledge this is the first example of a national professional body, representing a single surgical specialty, taking such a fundamental initiative.

In a hard-pressed clinical environment, the ability to achieve admission reliably on the day of surgery, in patients at ease with their situation and with little likelihood of late cancellation, will be of great benefit. It will reduce litigation and improve the patient experience.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1427–30.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1153 - 1154
1 Sep 2016
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 4 | Pages 435 - 436
1 Apr 2016
McNally MA


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1153 - 1155
1 Sep 2013
Timperley AJ Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1013 - 1014
1 Aug 2015
Haddad FS