Telehealth has the potential to change the way we approach patient care. From virtual consenting to reducing carbon emissions, costs, and waiting times, it is a powerful tool in our clinical armamentarium. There is mounting evidence that remote diagnostic evaluation and decision-making have reached an acceptable level of accuracy and can safely be adopted in orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, patients’ and surgeons’ satisfaction with virtual appointments are comparable to in-person consultations. Challenges to the widespread use of telehealth should, however, be acknowledged and include the cost of installation, training, maintenance, and accessibility. It is also vital that clinicians are conscious of the medicolegal and ethical considerations surrounding the medium and adhere strictly to the relevant data protection legislation and storage framework. It remains to be seen how organizations harness the full spectrum of the technology to facilitate effective patient care. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):843–849

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a swift adoption of telehealth in orthopaedic surgery. This study aimed to analyze the satisfaction of patients and surgeons with the rapid expansion of telehealth at this time within the division of adult reconstructive surgery at a major urban academic tertiary hospital. Methods. A total of 334 patients underging arthroplasty of the hip or knee who completed a telemedicine visit between 30 March and 30 April 2020 were sent a 14-question survey, scored on a five-point Likert scale. Eight adult reconstructive surgeons who used telemedicine during this time were sent a separate 14-question survey at the end of the study period. Factors influencing patient satisfaction were determined using univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling. Results. A total of 68 patients (20.4%) and 100% of the surgeons completed the surveys. Patients were “Satisfied” with their telemedicine visits (4.10/5.00 (SD 0.98)) and 19 (27.9%) would prefer telemedicine to in-person visits in the absence of COVID-19. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression modelling revealed that patients were more likely to be satisfied if their surgeon effectively responded to their questions or concerns (odds ratio (OR) 3.977; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.260 to 13.190; p = 0.019) and if their visit had a high audiovisual quality (OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.052 to 6.219; p = 0.042). Surgeons were “Satisfied” with their telemedicine experience (3.63/5.00 (SD 0.92)) and were “Fairly Confident” (4.00/5.00 (SD 0.53)) in their diagnostic accuracy despite finding the physical examinations to be only “Slightly Effective” (1.88/5.00 (SD 0.99)). Most adult reconstructive surgeons, seven of eight (87.5%) would continue to use telemedicine in the future. Conclusion. Telemedicine emerged as a valuable tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients undergoing arthroplasty and their surgeons were satisfied with telemedicine and see a role for its use after the pandemic. The audiovisual quality and the responsiveness of physicians to the concerns of patients determine their satisfaction. Future investigations should focus on improving the physical examination of patients through telemedicine and strategies for its widespread implementation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):196–204

Aims

The purpose of this study was to determine the access to and ability to use telemedicine technology in adult patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to determine associations with the socioeconomic characteristics of the patients, including age, sex, race, and education. We also sought to understand the patients’ perceived benefits, risks, and preferences when dealing with telemedicine.

We aim to explore the potential technologies for monitoring and assessment of patients undergoing arthroplasty by examining selected literature focusing on the technology currently available and reflecting on possible future development and application. The reviewed literature indicates a large variety of different hardware and software, widely available and used in a limited manner, to assess patients’ performance. There are extensive opportunities to enhance and integrate the systems which are already in existence to develop patient-specific pathways for rehabilitation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(10):1104–1109.

Literature surrounding artificial intelligence (AI)-related applications for hip and knee arthroplasty has proliferated. However, meaningful advances that fundamentally transform the practice and delivery of joint arthroplasty are yet to be realized, despite the broad range of applications as we continue to search for meaningful and appropriate use of AI. AI literature in hip and knee arthroplasty between 2018 and 2021 regarding image-based analyses, value-based care, remote patient monitoring, and augmented reality was reviewed. Concerns surrounding meaningful use and appropriate methodological approaches of AI in joint arthroplasty research are summarized. Of the 233 AI-related orthopaedics articles published, 178 (76%) constituted original research, while the rest consisted of editorials or reviews. A total of 52% of original AI-related research concerns hip and knee arthroplasty (n = 92), and a narrative review is described. Three studies were externally validated. Pitfalls surrounding present-day research include conflating vernacular (“AI/machine learning”), repackaging limited registry data, prematurely releasing internally validated prediction models, appraising model architecture instead of inputted data, withholding code, and evaluating studies using antiquated regression-based guidelines. While AI has been applied to a variety of hip and knee arthroplasty applications with limited clinical impact, the future remains promising if the question is meaningful, the methodology is rigorous and transparent, the data are rich, and the model is externally validated. Simple checkpoints for meaningful AI adoption include ensuring applications focus on: administrative support over clinical evaluation and management; necessity of the advanced model; and the novelty of the question being answered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1292–1303.