Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 481 - 500 of 2966
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 2 | Pages 124 - 134
1 Feb 2023
Jain S Farook MZ Aslam-Pervez N Amer M Martin DH Unnithan A Middleton R Dunlop DG Scott CEH West R Pandit H

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with revision surgery for the surgical management of Unified Classification System (UCS) type B periprosthetic femoral fractures around cemented polished taper-slip femoral components following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

Data were collected for patients admitted to five UK centres. The primary outcome measure was the two-year reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes were time to surgery, transfusion requirements, critical care requirements, length of stay, two-year local complication rates, six-month systemic complication rates, and mortality rates. Comparisons were made by the form of treatment (ORIF vs revision) and UCS type (B1 vs B2/B3). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed with two-year reoperation for any reason as the endpoint.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 4 | Pages 734 - 738
1 Apr 2021
Varshneya K Jokhai R Medress ZA Stienen MN Ho A Fatemi P Ratliff JK Veeravagu A

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for adverse events following the surgical correction of cervical spinal deformities in adults. Methods. We identified adult patients who underwent corrective cervical spinal surgery between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2015 from the MarketScan database. The baseline comorbidities and characteristics of the operation were recorded. Adverse events were defined as the development of a complication, an unanticipated deleterious postoperative event, or further surgery. Patients aged < 18 years and those with a previous history of tumour or trauma were excluded from the study. Results. A total of 13,549 adults in the database underwent primary corrective surgery for a cervical spinal deformity during the study period. A total of 3,785 (27.9%) had a complication within 90 days of the procedure, and 3,893 (28.7%) required further surgery within two years. In multivariate analysis, male sex (odds ratio (OR) 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 0.9); p = 0.019) and a posterior approach (compared with a combined surgical approach, OR 0.66 (95% CI 0.5 to 0.8); p < 0.001) significantly decreased the risk of complications. Osteoporosis (OR 1.41 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6); p < 0.001), dyspnoea (OR 1.48 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6); p < 0.001), cerebrovascular accident (OR 1.81 (95% CI 1.6 to 2.0); p < 0.001), a posterior approach (compared with an anterior approach, OR 1.23 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.4); p < 0.001), and the use of bone morphogenic protein (BMP) (OR 1.22 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.4); p = 0.003) significantly increased the risks of 90-day complications. In multivariate regression analysis, preoperative dyspnoea (OR 1.50 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.7); p < 0.001), a posterior approach (compared with an anterior approach, OR 2.80 (95% CI 2.4 to 3.2; p < 0.001), and postoperative dysphagia (OR 2.50 (95% CI 1.8 to 3.4); p < 0.001) were associated with a significantly increased risk of further surgery two years postoperatively. A posterior approach (compared with a combined approach, OR 0.32 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.4); p < 0.001), the use of BMP (OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.4 to 0.5); p < 0.001) were associated with a significantly decreased risk of further surgery at this time. Conclusion. The surgical approach and intraoperative use of BMP strongly influence the risk of further surgery, whereas the comorbidity burden and the characteristics of the operation influence the rates of early complications in adult patients undergoing corrective cervical spinal surgery. These data may aid surgeons in patient selection and surgical planning. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):734–738


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 4 | Pages 400 - 411
15 Mar 2023
Hosman AJF Barbagallo G van Middendorp JJ

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine whether early surgical treatment results in better neurological recovery 12 months after injury than late surgical treatment in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI).

Methods

Patients with tSCI requiring surgical spinal decompression presenting to 17 centres in Europe were recruited. Depending on the timing of decompression, patients were divided into early (≤ 12 hours after injury) and late (> 12 hours and < 14 days after injury) groups. The American Spinal Injury Association neurological (ASIA) examination was performed at baseline (after injury but before decompression) and at 12 months. The primary endpoint was the change in Lower Extremity Motor Score (LEMS) from baseline to 12 months.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 5 | Pages 23 - 27
1 Oct 2022


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 10 | Pages 753 - 758
4 Oct 2022
Farrow L Clement ND Smith D Meek DRM Ryan M Gillies K Anderson L Ashcroft GP

Aims

The extended wait that most patients are now experiencing for hip and knee arthroplasty has raised questions about whether reliance on waiting time as the primary driver for prioritization is ethical, and if other additional factors should be included in determining surgical priority. Our Prioritization of THose aWaiting hip and knee ArthroplastY (PATHWAY) project will explore which perioperative factors are important to consider when prioritizing those on the waiting list for hip and knee arthroplasty, and how these factors should be weighted. The final product will include a weighted benefit score that can be used to aid in surgical prioritization for those awaiting elective primary hip and knee arthroplasty.

Methods

There will be two linked work packages focusing on opinion from key stakeholders (patients and surgeons). First, an online modified Delphi process to determine a consensus set of factors that should be involved in patient prioritization. This will be performed using standard Delphi methodology consisting of multiple rounds where following initial individual rating there is feedback, discussion, and further recommendations undertaken towards eventual consensus. The second stage will then consist of a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to allow for priority setting of the factors derived from the Delphi through elicitation of weighted benefit scores. The DCE consists of several choice tasks designed to elicit stakeholder preference regarding included attributes (factors).


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 9, Issue 5 | Pages 250 - 257
1 May 2020
Png ME Griffin XL Costa ML Achten J Pinedo-Villanueva R

Aims. This feasibility study investigates the utilization and cost of health resources related to formal and informal care, home adaptations, and physiotherapy among patients aged 60 years and above after hip fracture from a multicentre cohort study (World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE)) in the UK. Methods. A questionnaire containing health resource use was completed at baseline and four months post-injury by patients or their carer. Completion rate and mean cost of each health resource item were assessed and sensitivity analysis was performed to derive a conservative estimate of the informal care cost. All costs are presented in 2017/18 pound sterling. Results. A total of 4,183 patients from the WHiTE cohort completed the baseline questionnaire between May 2017 and April 2018, of whom 3,524 (84.2%) completed the four-month health resource section. Estimated mean costs of formal and informal care, home adaptations, and physiotherapy during the four months following injury were £2,843 (SD 5,467), £6,613 (SD 15,146), £706 (SD 1,706) and £9 (SD 33), respectively. Mean cost of informal care decreased to £660 (SD £1,040) in the sensitivity analysis when informal care was capped at 17.2 hours per day. Conclusion. Informal care is a significant source of costs after hip fracture and should therefore be included in future economical analyses of this patient group. Our results show that there is considerable variation in the interpretation of time-use of informal care among patients and further work is needed to improve how data regarding informal care are collected in order to obtain a more accurate cost estimate. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res. 2020;9(5):250–257


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 1 | Pages 46 - 46
1 Feb 2024


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 5 | Pages 54 - 54
1 Oct 2024


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 2 | Pages 50 - 50
1 Apr 2024


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 1 | Pages 1 - 2
1 Jan 2024
Haddad FS


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 1 | Pages 3 - 4
1 Feb 2023
Ollivere B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 6 | Pages 3 - 4
1 Dec 2023
Ollivere B


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 9 | Pages 943 - 945
1 Sep 2023
Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 7 | Pages 640 - 641
1 Jul 2024
Ashby E Haddad FS


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 2 | Pages 5 - 6
1 Apr 2024
Ollivere B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 49 - 50
1 Oct 2023
Marson BA

This edition of Cochrane Corner looks at some of the work published by the Cochrane Collaboration, covering pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing definitive fixation or joint replacement for hip, pelvic, and long bone fractures; interventions for reducing red blood cell transfusion in adults undergoing hip fracture surgery: an overview of systematic reviews; and pharmacological treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1479 - 1488
1 Dec 2019
Laverdière C Corban J Khoury J Ge SM Schupbach J Harvey EJ Reindl R Martineau PA

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 Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 3 | Pages 224 - 226
1 Mar 2024
Ferguson D Perry DC


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 13, Issue 3 | Pages 48 - 49
3 Jun 2024
Marson BA

The Cochrane Collaboration has produced five new reviews relevant to bone and joint surgery since the publication of the last Cochrane Corner These reviews are relevant to a wide range of musculoskeletal specialists, and include reviews in Morton’s neuroma, scoliosis, vertebral fractures, carpal tunnel syndrome, and lower limb arthroplasty.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 3 | Pages 40 - 41
1 Jun 2023

The June 2023 Research Roundup360 looks at: Characterizing recurrent infections after one-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the knee; Predicted waiting times for orthopaedic surgery: an urgent need to address the deficit in capacity; Vascular impulse technology versus elevation for reducing the swelling of upper and lower limb joint fractures; Desperate patients will accept higher risks; How long does it take to find a positive culture in periprosthetic joint infection?