Aims. Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme. Methods. We used a consensus process consisting of an evidence review to generate items for the guidelines and online consensus questionnaire and virtual face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the guidelines. Results. The consensus panel comprised 21 clinical experts in orthopaedics, primary care, rehabilitation, and healthcare commissioning. The final output from the consensus process was a 14-item guideline. The guidelines make recommendations regarding increased vigilance and monitoring of those at increased risk of infection; diagnosis including strategies to ensure the early recognition of prosthetic infection and referral to orthopaedic teams; treatment, including early use of DAIR and revision strategies; and postoperative management including appropriate physical and psychological support and antibiotic strategies. Conclusion. We believe the implementation of the INFORM guidelines will inform treatment protocols and clinical pathways to improve the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(4):226–233

Aims. Urgent referral to a specialist centre for patients with a soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) has been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK since 2006. However, the impact of this recommendation on the prognosis for these patients remains unclear. We aimed to determine the impact of the NICE guidelines on the disease-specific survival (DSS) of patients with an STS. Methods. A total of 2,427 patients with an STS referred to a supraregional centre in the ten-year periods before (n = 1,386) and after (n = 1,041) the issue of the NICE guidelines were evaluated. Results. The mean size of the tumour was significantly smaller at the time of diagnosis (10.3 cm (SD 6.5) vs 9.1 cm (SD 6.2); p < 0.001) and the number of patients who had undergone an inadvertent excision significantly decreased (28% (n = 389) vs 20% (n = 204); p < 0.001) following the introduction of the NICE guidelines. The five-year DSS was 63% in the pre-NICE and 71% in post-NICE groups (p < 0.001). The improved survival was more significant for those with a high-grade tumour (pre-NICE, 48%; post-NICE, 68%; p < 0.001). In those with a high-grade tumour, the mean size of the tumour (11.6 cm (SD 6.2) vs 9.6 cm (SD 5.8); p < 0.001) and the number of patients with metastasis at the time of diagnosis (15% (n = 124 vs 10% (n = 80); p = 0.007) significantly decreased in the post-NICE group. Conclusion. An improvement in survival was seen after the introduction of the NICE guidelines, especially in patients with a high-grade STS. More patients were referred at an earlier stage, indicating a clearer pathway after the issue of national policy for the management of STSs in the UK. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):569–577

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the consensus best practice approach for the investigation and management of children (aged 0 to 15 years) in the UK with musculoskeletal infection (including septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, pyomyositis, tenosynovitis, fasciitis, and discitis). This consensus can then be used to ensure consistent, safe care for children in UK hospitals and those elsewhere with similar healthcare systems. Methods. A Delphi approach was used to determine consensus in three core aspects of care: 1) assessment, investigation, and diagnosis; 2) treatment; and 3) service, pathways, and networks. A steering group of paediatric orthopaedic surgeons created statements which were then evaluated through a two-round Delphi survey sent to all members of the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery (BSCOS). Statements were only included (‘consensus in’) in the final agreed consensus if at least 75% of respondents scored the statement as critical for inclusion. Statements were discarded (‘consensus out’) if at least 75% of respondents scored them as not important for inclusion. Reporting these results followed the Appraisal Guidelines for Research and Evaluation. Results. A total of 133 children’s orthopaedic surgeons completed the first survey, and 109 the second. Out of 43 proposed statements included in the initial Delphi, 32 reached ‘consensus in’, 0 ‘consensus out’, and 11 ‘no consensus’. These 11 statements were then reworded, amalgamated, or deleted before the second Delphi round of eight statements. All eight were accepted as ‘consensus in’, resulting in a total of 40 approved statements. Conclusion. In the many aspects of medicine where relevant evidence is not available for clinicians to base their practice, a Delphi consensus can provide a strong body of opinion that acts as a benchmark for good quality clinical care. We would recommend clinicians managing children with musculoskeletal infection follow the guidance in the consensus statements in this article, to ensure care in all medical settings is consistent and safe. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(7):815–820

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe variation in hip fracture treatment in Norway expressed as adherence to international and national evidence-based treatment guidelines, to study factors influencing deviation from guidelines, and to analyze consequences of non-adherence. Methods. International and national guidelines were identified and treatment recommendations extracted. All 43 hospitals routinely treating hip fractures in Norway were characterized. From the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (NHFR), hip fracture patients aged > 65 years and operated in the period January 2014 to December 2018 for fractures with conclusive treatment guidelines were included (n = 29,613: femoral neck fractures (n = 21,325), stable trochanteric fractures (n = 5,546), inter- and subtrochanteric fractures (n = 2,742)). Adherence to treatment recommendations and a composite indicator of best practice were analyzed. Patient survival and reoperations were evaluated for each recommendation. Results. Median age of the patients was 84 (IQR 77 to 89) years and 69% (20,427/29,613) were women. Overall, 79% (23,390/29,613) were treated within 48 hours, and 80% (23,635/29,613) by a surgeon with more than three years’ experience. Adherence to guidelines varied substantially but was markedly better in 2018 than in 2014. Having a dedicated hip fracture unit (OR 1.06, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.11) and a hospital hip fracture programme (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.27) increased the probability of treatment according to best practice. Surgery after 48 hours increased one-year mortality significantly (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.22; p = 0.001). Alternative treatment to arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) increased mortality after 30 days (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.62)) and one year (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.72), and also increased the number of reoperations (OR 4.61, 95% CI 3.73 to 5.71). An uncemented stem increased the risk of reoperation significantly (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48; p = 0.030). Conclusion. Our study demonstrates a substantial variation between hospitals in adherence to evidence-based guidelines for treatment of hip fractures in Norway. Non-adherence can be ascribed to in-hospital factors. Poor adherence has significant negative consequences for patients in the form of increased mortality rates at 30 and 365 days post-treatment and in reoperation rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-10:644–653

We evaluated the quality of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery by examining how they adhere to validated methodological standards in their development. A structured review was performed for guidelines that were published between January 2005 and April 2013 in medical journals or on the Internet. A pre-defined computerised search was used in MEDLINE, Scopus and Google to identify the guidelines. The AGREE II assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the guidelines in the study. . Seven international and national guidelines were identified. The overall methodological quality of the individual guidelines was good. ‘Scope and Purpose’ (median score 98% interquartile range (IQR)) 86% to 98%) and ‘Clarity of Presentation’ (median score 90%, IQR 90% to 95%) were the two domains that received the highest scores. ‘Applicability’ (median score 68%, IQR 45% to 75%) and ‘Editorial Independence’ (median score 71%, IQR 68% to 75%) had the lowest scores. . These findings reveal that although the overall methodological quality of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery is good, domains within their development, such as ‘Applicability’ and ‘Editorial Independence’, need to be improved. Application of the AGREE II instrument by the authors of guidelines may improve the quality of future guidelines and provide increased focus on aspects of methodology used in their development that are not robust. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:19–23

Symptomatic and asymptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) is a common complication of knee replacement, with an incidence of up to 85% in the absence of prophylaxis. National guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in knee replacement are derived from total knee replacement (TKR) data. No guidelines exist specific to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). We investigated whether the type of knee arthroplasty (TKR or UKR) was related to the incidence of DVT and discuss the applicability of existing national guidelines for prophylaxis following UKR. . Data were collected prospectively on 3449 knee replacements, including procedure type, tourniquet time, surgeon, patient age, use of drains and gender. These variables were related to the incidence of symptomatic DVT. The overall DVT rate was 1.6%. The only variable that had an association with DVT was operation type, with TKR having a higher incidence than UKR (2.2% versus 0.3%, p < 0.001). These data show that the incidence of DVT after UKR is both clinically and statistically significantly lower than that after TKR. . TKR and UKR patients have different risk profiles for symptomatic DVT. The risk-benefit ratio for TKR that has been used to produce national guidelines may not be applicable to UKR. Further research is required to establish the most appropriate form of prophylaxis for UKR

Following the publication in 2007 of the guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) for prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism (VTE) for patients undergoing surgery, concerns were raised by British orthopaedic surgeons as to the appropriateness of the recommendations for their clinical practice. In order to address these concerns NICE and the British Orthopaedic Association agreed to engage a representative panel of orthopaedic surgeons in the process of developing expanded VTE guidelines applicable to all patients admitted to hospital. The functions of this panel were to review the evidence and to consider the applicability and implications in orthopaedic practice in order to advise the main Guideline Development Group in framing recommendations. The panel considered both direct and indirect evidence of the safety and efficacy, the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis and its implication in clinical practice for orthopaedic patients. We describe the process of selection of the orthopaedic panel, the evidence considered and the contribution of the panel to the latest guidelines from NICE on the prophylaxis against VTE, published in January 2010

Health economic evaluations potentially provide valuable information to clinicians, health care administrators, and policy makers regarding the financial implications of decisions about the care of patients. The highest quality research should be used to inform decisions that have direct impact on the access to care and the outcome of treatment. However, economic analyses are often complex and use research methods which are relatively unfamiliar to clinicians. Furthermore, health economic data have substantial national, regional, and institutional variability, which can limit the external validity of the results of a study. Therefore, minimum guidelines that aim to standardise the quality and transparency of reporting health economic research have been developed, and instruments are available to assist in the assessment of its quality and the interpretation of results. The purpose of this editorial is to discuss the principal types of health economic studies, to review the most common instruments for judging the quality of these studies and to describe current reporting guidelines. Recommendations for the submission of these types of studies to The Bone & Joint Journal are provided. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:147–51

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) produces recommendations on appropriate treatment within the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales. The NICE guidelines on prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in orthopaedic surgery recommend that all patients be offered a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). The linked hospital episode statistics of 219 602 patients were examined to determine the rates of complications following lower limb arthroplasty for the 12-month periods prior to and following the publication of these guidelines. These were compared with data from the National Joint Registry (England and Wales) regarding the use of LMWH during the same periods. There was a significant increase in the reported use of LMWH (59.5% to 67.6%, p < 0.001) following the publication of the guidelines. However, the 90-day venous thromboembolism events actually increased slightly following total hip replacement (THR, 1.69% to 1.84%, p = 0.06) and remained unchanged following total knee replacement (TKR, 1.99% to 2.04%). Return to theatre in the first 30 days for infection did not show significant changes. There was an increase in the number of patients diagnosed with thrombocytopenia, which was significant following THR (0.11% to 0.16%, p = 0.04). The recommendations from NICE are based on predicted reductions in venous thromboembolism events, reducing morbidity, mortality and costs to the NHS. The early results in orthopaedic patients do not support these predictions, but do show an increase in complications

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) published the guidelines on the selection of prostheses for primary hip replacement in 2000. They supported the use of cemented hip prostheses to the exclusion of uncemented and hybrid implants. The information from the Trent (and Wales) Regional Arthroplasty Study has been examined to identify retrospectively the types of hip prostheses used between 1990 and 2005, and to assess the impact that the guidelines have had on orthopaedic practice. The results show that the publication of the NICE guidelines has had little impact on clinical practice, with the use of uncemented prostheses increasing from 6.7% (137) in 2001 to 19.2% (632) in 2005. The use of hybrid prostheses has more than doubled from 8.8% (181) to 22% (722) of all hips implanted in the same period. The recommendations made by NICE are not being followed, which calls into question their value

Objectives. Guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) have been available to the orthopaedic community for more than a decade, with little improvement in service provision to this increasingly large patient group. Improvements in adjuvant and neo-adjuvant treatments have increased both the number and overall survival of patients living with MBD. As a consequence the incidence of complications of MBD presenting to surgeons has increased and is set to increase further. The British Orthopaedic Oncology Society (BOOS) are to publish more revised detailed guidelines on what represents ‘best practice’ in managing patients with MBD. This article is designed to coincide with and publicise new BOOS guidelines and once again champion the cause of patients with MBD. . Methods. A series of short cases highlight common errors frequently being made in managing patients with MBD despite the availability of guidelines. Results. Despite guidelines for the management of patients with MBD being available for more than a decade basic errors in management continue to be made, affecting patient survival and quality of life. Conclusions. It is hoped that by publicising the new BOOS guidelines the management of patients with MBD will improve over the next decade, significantly more than it has over the last decade

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently published guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection. The WHO guidelines, if implemented worldwide, could have an immense impact on our practices and those of the CDC have implications for healthcare policy in the United States. Our aim was to review the strategies for prevention of periprosthetic joint infection in light of these and other recent guidelines. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):3–10

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains an immediate threat to patients following total hip and knee replacement. While there is a strong consensus that steps should be taken to minimise the risk to patients by utilising some forms of prophylaxis for the vast majority of patients, the methods utilised have been extremely variable. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been published by various professional organisations for over 25 years to provide recommendations to standardise VTE prophylaxis. Historically, these recommendations have varied widely depending in underlying assumptions, goals, and methodology of the various groups. This effort has previously been exemplified by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). The former group of medical specialists targeted minimising venographically proven deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (the vast majority of which are asymptomatic) as their primary goal prior to 2012. The latter group of surgeons targeted minimising symptomatic VTE. As a result prior to 2012, the recommendations of the two groups were widely divergent. In the past year, both groups have reassessed the current literature with the principal goals of minimising symptomatic VTE events and bleeding complications. As a result, for the first time the CPGs of these two major subspecialty organisations are in close agreement

Aims

The aim of this retrospective audit was to determine the route of referral or presentation of patients requiring revision following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).

The extent and depth of routine health care data are growing at an ever-increasing rate, forming huge repositories of information. These repositories can answer a vast array of questions. However, an understanding of the purpose of the dataset used and the quality of the data collected are paramount to determine the reliability of the result obtained.

This Editorial describes the importance of adherence to sound methodological principles in the reporting and publication of research using ‘big’ data, with a suggested reporting framework for future Bone & Joint Journal submissions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1575–7.

Aims. Supracondylar fractures are the most frequently occurring paediatric fractures about the elbow and may be associated with a neurovascular injury. The British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma 11 (BOAST 11) guidelines describe best practice for supracondylar fracture management. This study aimed to assess whether emergency departments in the United Kingdom adhere to BOAST 11 standard 1: a documented assessment, performed on presentation, must include the status of the radial pulse, digital capillary refill time, and the individual function of the radial, median (including the anterior interosseous), and ulnar nerves. . Materials and Methods. Stage 1: We conducted a multicentre, retrospective audit of adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1. Data were collected from eight hospitals in the United Kingdom. A total of 433 children with Gartland type 2 or 3 supracondylar fractures were eligible for inclusion. A centrally created data collection sheet was used to guide objective analysis of whether BOAST 11 standard 1 was adhered to. Stage 2: We created a quality improvement proforma for use in emergency departments. This was piloted in one of the hospitals used in the primary audit and was re-audited using equivalent methodology. In all, 102 patients presenting between January 2016 and July 2017 were eligible for inclusion in the re-audit. Results. Stage 1: Of 433 patient notes audited, adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 was between 201 (46%) and 232 (54%) for the motor and sensory function of the individual nerves specified, 318 (73%) for radial pulse, and 247 (57%) for digital capillary refill time. Stage 2: Of 102 patient notes audited, adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 improved to between 72 (71%) and 80 (78%) for motor and sensory function of the nerves, to 84 (82%) for radial pulse, and to 82 (80%) for digital capillary refill time. Of the 102 case notes reviewed in stage 2, only 44 (43%) used the quality improvement proforma; when the proforma was used, adherence improved to between 40 (91%) and 43 (98%) throughout. Conclusion. Adherence to BOAST 11 standard 1 is poor in hospitals across the country. This is concerning as neurovascular deficit may be an indication for emergent surgery, and missed neurovascular injury can cause long-term, or even permanent, functional impairment. We present a simple proforma that improves adherence to this standard, can easily be implemented into emergency departments, and may improve patient safety. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:346–51

Aims

The aim of the British Association for Surgery of the Knee (BASK) Meniscal Consensus Project was to develop an evidence-based treatment guideline for patients with meniscal lesions of the knee.