Aims. This study assesses patient barriers to successful telemedicine care in orthopaedic practices in a large academic practice in the COVID-19 era. Methods. In all, 381 patients scheduled for telemedicine visits with three orthopaedic surgeons in a large academic practice from 1 April 2020 to 12 June 2020 were asked to participate in a telephone survey using a standardized Institutional Review Board-approved script. An unsuccessful telemedicine visit was defined as patient-reported difficulty of use or reported dissatisfaction with teleconferencing. Patient barriers were defined as explicitly reported barriers of unsatisfactory visit using a process-based satisfaction metric. Statistical analyses were conducted using analysis of variances (ANOVAs), ranked ANOVAs, post-hoc pairwise testing, and chi-squared independent analysis with 95% confidence interval. Results. The survey response rate was 39.9% (n = 152). The mean age of patients was 51.1 years (17 to 85), and 55 patients (38%) were male. Of 146 respondents with completion of survey, 27 (18.5%) reported a barrier to completing their telemedicine visit. The majority of patients were satisfied with using telemedicine for their orthopaedic appointment (88.8%), and found the experience to be easy (86.6%). Patient-reported barriers included lack of proper equipment/internet connection (n = 13; 8.6%), scheduling difficulty (n = 2; 1.3%), difficulty following directions (n = 10; 6.6%), and patient-reported discomfort (n = 2; 1.3%). Barriers based on patient characteristics were age > 61 years, non-English primary language, inexperience with video conferencing, and unwillingness to try telemedicine prior to COVID-19. Conclusion. The barriers identified in this study could be used to screen patients who would potentially have an unsuccessful telemedicine visit, allowing practices to provide assistance to patients to reduce the risk of an unsuccessful visit. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):745–751

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. Methods. We performed a cross-sectional survey involving patients awaiting primary THA and TKA by one of six surgeons at a single academic institution. Patients were included and called for a telephone-administered survey if their surgery was scheduled to be between 23 March and 2 June 2020, and were aged > 18 years. Results. The response rate was 52% (189 of 363 patients). A total of 170 patients (90.4%) reported using the internet, 177 (94.1%) reported owning a device capable of videoconferencing, and 143 (76.1%) had participated in a video call in the past year. When asked for their preferred method for a consultation, 155 (82.8%) and 26 (13.9%) ranked in-person and a videoconference as their first choice, respectively. The perceived benefits of telemedicine consultations included reduced travel to appointments (165 (88.2%) agreed) and reduced cost of attending appointments (123 (65.8%) agreed). However, patients were concerned that they would not establish the same patient-physician connection (100 (53.8%) agreed), and would not receive the same level of care (52 (33.2%) agreed) using telemedicine consultations compared with in-person consultations. Conclusion. Most patients undergoing arthroplasty have access to and are capable of using the technology required for telemedicine consultations. However, they still prefer in-person consultations due to concerns that they will not establish the same patient-physician connection and will not receive the same level of care, despite the benefits of reducing the time spent in travelling and the cost of attending appointments, and the appointments being easier to attend. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):98–102

Aims. In the UK, the NHS generates an estimated 25 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (4% to 5% of the nation’s total carbon emissions) and produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste annually. There is limited evidence demonstrating the principles of sustainability and its benefits within orthopaedic surgery. The primary aim of this study was to analyze the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery and the environmentally sustainable initiatives undertaken to address this. The secondary aim of this study was to describe the barriers to making sustainable changes within orthopaedic surgery. Methods. A literature search was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines through EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed libraries using two domains of terms: “orthopaedic surgery” and “environmental sustainability”. Results. A total of 13 studies were included in the final analysis. All papers studied the environmental impact of orthopaedic surgery in one of three areas: waste management, resource consumption, and carbon emissions. Waste segregation was a prevalent issue and described by nine studies, with up to 74.4% of hazardous waste being generated. Of this, six studies reported recycling waste and up to 43.9% of waste per procedure was recyclable. Large joint arthroplasties generated the highest amount of recyclable waste per procedure. Three studies investigated carbon emissions from intraoperative consumables, sterilization methods, and through the use of telemedicine. One study investigated water wastage and demonstrated that simple changes to practice can reduce water consumption by up to 63%. The two most common barriers to implementing environmentally sustainable changes identified across the studies was a lack of appropriate infrastructure and lack of education and training. Conclusion. Environmental sustainability in orthopaedic surgery is a growing area with a wide potential for meaningful change. Further research to cumulatively study the carbon footprint of orthopaedic surgery and the wider impact of environmentally sustainable changes is necessary. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):628–640

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.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:222–228

The October 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup. 360 . looks at: TightRope in Weber C fractures; A second look at the TightRope; Incisional VAC comes of age?; Platelet-derived growth factor and ankle fusions; Achilles tendon rehab in the longer term following surgery; Telemedicine for diabetic foot ulcer

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has raised the profile and level of interest in the use, acceptability, safety, and effectiveness of virtual outpatient consultations and telemedicine. These models of care are not new but a number of challenges have so far hindered widespread take-up and endorsement of these ways of working. With the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, remote and virtual working and consultation have become the default. This paper explores our experience of and learning from virtual and remote consultation and questions how this experience can be retained and developed for the future. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):301–304

The October 2014 Trauma Roundup. 360 . looks at: proximal humeral fractures in children; quadrilateral surface plates in transverse acetabular fractures; sleep deprivation and poor outcomes in trauma; bipolar hemiarthroplasty; skeletal traction; forefoot fractures; telemedicine in trauma; ketamine infusion for orthopaedic injuries; and improved functional outcomes seen with trauma networks

Aims. Computer-based applications are increasingly being used by orthopaedic surgeons in their clinical practice. With the integration of technology in surgery, augmented reality (AR) may become an important tool for surgeons in the future. By superimposing a digital image on a user’s view of the physical world, this technology shows great promise in orthopaedics. The aim of this review is to investigate the current and potential uses of AR in orthopaedics. Materials and Methods. A systematic review of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases up to January 2019 using the keywords ‘orthopaedic’ OR ‘orthopedic AND augmented reality’ was performed by two independent reviewers. Results. A total of 41 publications were included after screening. Applications were divided by subspecialty: spine (n = 15), trauma (n = 16), arthroplasty (n = 3), oncology (n = 3), and sports (n = 4). Out of these, 12 were clinical in nature. AR-based technologies have a wide variety of applications, including direct visualization of radiological images by overlaying them on the patient and intraoperative guidance using preoperative plans projected onto real anatomy, enabling hands-free real-time access to operating room resources, and promoting telemedicine and education. Conclusion. There is an increasing interest in AR among orthopaedic surgeons. Although studies show similar or better outcomes with AR compared with traditional techniques, many challenges need to be addressed before this technology is ready for widespread use. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1479–1488

The April 2015 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup. 360 . looks at: Reducing the incidence of DDH – is ‘back carrying’ the answer?; Surgical approach and AVN may not be linked in DDH; First year routine radiographic follow up for scoliosis not necessary; Diagnosis of osteochondritis dessicans; Telemedicine in paediatrics; Regional anesthesia in supracondylar fractures?

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.

The June 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Machine learning to identify surgical candidates for hip and knee arthroplasty: a viable option?; Poor outcome after debridement and implant retention; Can you cement polyethylene liners into well-fixed acetabular shells in hip revision?; Revision stem in primary arthroplasties: the Exeter 44/0 125 mm stem; Depression and anxiety: could they be linked to infection?; Does where you live affect your outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasties?; Racial disparities in outcomes after total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty are substantially mediated by socioeconomic disadvantage both in black and white patients.

The April 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; Prevalence and predisposing factors of neuropathic pain in patients with rotator cuff tears; Are two plates better than one? The clavicle fracture reimagined; A single cell atlas of frozen shoulder capsule identifies features associated with inflammatory fibrosis resolution; Complication rates and deprivation go hand in hand with total shoulder arthroplasty; Longitudinal instability injuries of the forearm; A better than “best-fit circle” method for glenoid bone loss assessment; 3D supraspinatus muscle volume and intramuscular fatty infiltration after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

The June 2024 Wrist & Hand Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: One-year outcomes of the anatomical front and back reconstruction for scapholunate dissociation; Limited intercarpal fusion versus proximal row carpectomy in the treatment of SLAC or SNAC wrist: results after 3.5 years; Prognostic factors for clinical outcomes after arthroscopic treatment of traumatic central tears of the triangular fibrocartilage complex; The rate of nonunion in the MRI-detected occult scaphoid fracture: a multicentre cohort study; Does correction of carpal malalignment influence the union rate of scaphoid nonunion surgery?; Provision of a home-based video-assisted therapy programme in thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty; Is replantation associated with better hand function after traumatic hand amputation than after revision amputation?; Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence for detection of scaphoid and distal radius fractures: a systematic review.

The February 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Does indomethacin prevent heterotopic ossification following elbow fracture fixation?; Arthroscopic capsular shift in atraumatic shoulder joint instability; Ultrasound-guided lavage with corticosteroid injection versus sham; Combined surgical and exercise-based interventions following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Are vascularized fibula autografts a long-lasting reconstruction after intercalary resection of the humerus for primary bone tumours?; Anatomical versus reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with limited forward elevation; Tension band or plate fixation for simple displaced olecranon fractures?; Is long-term follow-up and monitoring in shoulder and elbow arthroplasty needed?