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 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 variation in surgical performance, both between centres and individual surgeons, has recently been of significant political, media and public interest. Within the United Kingdom, a government agenda to increase accountability amongst surgeons has led to the online publication of ‘surgeon-level’ data. Surgeons, journalists and the public need to understand these data if they are to be useful in driving up standards of surgical care. This Editorial describes the use of Funnel Plots, which are the common means by which such data are presented, and discusses how the plots are generated.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1156–7.

This editorial examines the influence of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) on the conduct of orthopaedic surgery. It proffers criticism and suggests ways of improvement.