Aims

The risk to patients and healthcare workers of resuming elective orthopaedic surgery following the peak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has been difficult to quantify. This has prompted governing bodies to adopt a cautious approach that may be impractical and financially unsustainable. The lack of evidence has made it impossible for surgeons to give patients an informed perspective of the consequences of elective surgery in the presence of SARS-CoV-2. This study aims to determine, for the UK population, the probability of a patient being admitted with an undetected SARS-CoV-2 infection and their resulting risk of death; taking into consideration the current disease prevalence, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing, and preassessment pathway.

Aims. Prior to the availability of vaccines, mortality for hip fracture patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection was three times higher than pre-pandemic rates. The primary aim of this study was to determine the 30-day mortality rate of hip fracture patients in the post-vaccine era. Methods. A multicentre observational study was carried out at 19 NHS Trusts in England. The study period for the data collection was 1 February 2021 until 28 February 2022, with mortality tracing until 28 March 2022. Data collection included demographic details, data points to calculate the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, COVID-19 status, 30-day mortality, and vaccination status. Results. A total of 337 patients tested positive for COVID-19. The overall 30-day mortality in these patients was 7.7%: 5.5% in vaccinated patients and 21.7% in unvaccinated patients. There was no significant difference between post-vaccine mortality compared with pre-pandemic 2019 controls (7.7% vs 5.0%; p = 0.068). Independent risk factors for mortality included unvaccinated status, Abbreviated Mental Test Score ≤ 6, male sex, age > 80 years, and time to theatre > 36 hours, in decreasing order of effect size. Conclusion. The vaccination programme has reduced 30-day mortality rates in hip fracture patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection to a level similar to pre-pandemic. Mortality for unvaccinated patients remained high. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1362–1368

Aims. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, incidence of hip fracture has not changed. Evidence has shown increased mortality rates associated with COVID-19 infection. However, little is known about the outcomes of COVID-19 negative patients in a pandemic environment. In addition, the impact of vitamin D levels on mortality in COVID-19 hip fracture patients has yet to be determined. Methods. This multicentre observational study included 1,633 patients who sustained a hip fracture across nine hospital trusts in North West England. Data were collected for three months from March 2020 and for the same period in 2019. Patients were matched by Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS), hospital, and fracture type. We looked at the mortality outcomes of COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative patients sustaining a hip fracture. We also looked to see if vitamin D levels had an impact on mortality. Results. The demographics of the 2019 and 2020 groups were similar, with a slight increase in proportion of male patients in the 2020 group. The 30-day mortality was 35.6% in COVID-19 positive patients and 7.8% in the COVID-19 negative patients. There was a potential association of decreasing vitamin D levels and increasing mortality rates for COVID-19 positive patients although our findings did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. In 2020 there was a significant increase in 30-day mortality rates of patients who were COVID-19 positive but not of patients who were COVID-19 negative. Low levels of vitamin D may be associated with high mortality rates in COVID-19 positive patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):782–787

Aims. Elective operating was halted during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase the capacity to provide care to an unprecedented volume of critically unwell patients. During the pandemic, the orthopaedic department at the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board restructured the trauma service, relocating semi-urgent ambulatory trauma operating to the isolated clean elective centre (St. Woolos’ Hospital) from the main hospital receiving COVID-19 patients (Royal Gwent Hospital). This study presents our experience of providing semi-urgent trauma care in a COVID-19-free surgical unit as a safe way to treat trauma patients during the pandemic and a potential model for restarting an elective orthopaedic service. Methods. All patients undergoing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic at the orthopaedic surgical unit (OSU) in St. Woolos’ Hospital from 23 March 2020 to 24 April 2020 were included. All patients that were operated on had a telephone follow-up two weeks after surgery to assess if they had experienced COVID-19 symptoms or had been tested for COVID-19. The nature of admission, operative details, and patient demographics were obtained from the health board’s electronic record. Staff were assessed for sickness, self-isolation, and COVID-19 status. Results. A total of 58 surgical procedures were undertaken at the OSU during the study period; 93% (n = 54) of patients completed the telephone follow-up. Open reduction and internal fixation of ankle and wrist fractures were the most common procedures. None of the patients nor members of their households had developed symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 or required testing. No staff members reported sick days or were advised by occupational health to undergo viral testing. Conclusion. This study provides optimism that orthopaedic patients planned for surgery can be protected from COVID-19 nosocomial transmission at separate COVID-19-free sites. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:302–308

Aims. The safe resumption of elective orthopaedic surgery following the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant challenge. A number of institutions have developed a COVID-free pathway for elective surgery patients in order to minimize the risk of viral transmission. The aim of this study is to identify the perioperative viral transmission rate in elective orthopaedic patients following the restart of elective surgery. Methods. This is a prospective study of 121 patients who underwent elective orthopaedic procedures through a COVID-free pathway. All patients underwent a 14-day period of self-isolation, had a negative COVID-19 test within 72 hours of surgery, and underwent surgery at a COVID-free site. Baseline patient characteristics were recorded including age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, body mass index (BMI), procedure, and admission type. Patients were contacted 14 days following discharge to determine if they had had a positive COVID-19 test (COVID-confirmed) or developed symptoms consistent with COVID-19 (COVID-19-presumed). Results. The study included 74 females (61.2%) and 47 males (38.8%) with a mean age of 52.3 years ± 17.6 years (18 to 83 years). The ASA grade was grade I in 26 patients (21.5%), grade II in 70 patients (57.9%), grade III in 24 patients (19.8%), and grade IV in one patient (0.8%). A total of 18 patients (14.9%) had underlying cardiovascular disease, 17 (14.0%) had pulmonary disease, and eight (6.6%) had diabetes mellitus. No patients (0%) had a positive COVID-19 test in the postoperative period. One patient (0.8%) developed anosmia postoperatively without respiratory symptoms or a fever. The patient did not undergo a COVID-19 test and self-isolated for seven days. Her symptoms resolved within a few days. Conclusion. The development of a COVID-free pathway for elective orthopaedic patients results in very low viral transmission rates. While both surgeons and patients should remain vigilant, elective surgery can be safely restarted using dedicated pathways and procedures. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:562–567

Aim. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents significant challenges to healthcare systems globally. Orthopaedic surgeons are at risk of contracting COVID-19 due to their close contact with patients in both outpatient and theatre environments. The aim of this review was to perform a literature review, including articles of other coronaviruses, to formulate guidelines for orthopaedic healthcare staff. Methods. A search of Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, World Health Organization (WHO), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) databases was performed encompassing a variety of terms including ‘coronavirus’, ‘covid-19’, ‘orthopaedic’, ‘personal protective environment’ and ‘PPE’. Online database searches identified 354 articles. Articles were included if they studied any of the other coronaviruses or if the basic science could potentially applied to COVID-19 (i.e. use of an inactivated virus with a similar diameter to COVID-19). Two reviewers independently identified and screened articles based on the titles and abstracts. 274 were subsequently excluded, with 80 full-text articles retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Of these, 66 were excluded as they compared personal protection equipment to no personal protection equipment or referred to prevention measures in the context of bacterial infections. Results. There is a paucity of high quality evidence surrounding COVID-19. This review collates evidence from previous coronavirus outbreaks to put forward recommendations for orthopaedic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. The key findings have been summarized and interpreted for application to the orthopaedic operative setting. Conclusion. For COVID-19 positive patients, minimum suggested PPE includes N95 respirator, goggles, face shield, gown, double gloves, and surgical balaclava. Space suits not advised. Be trained in the correct technique of donning and doffing PPE. Use negative pressure theatres if available. Minimize aerosolization and its effects (smoke evacuation and no pulse lavage). Minimize further unnecessary patient-staff contact (dissolvable sutures, clear dressings, split casts)

Aim. Restarting elective services presents a challenge to restore and improve many of the planned patient care pathways which have been suspended during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A significant backlog of planned elective work has built up representing a considerable volume of patient need. We aimed to investigate the health status, quality of life, and the impact of delay for patients whose referrals and treatment for symptomatic joint arthritis had been delayed as a result of the response to COVID-19. Methods. We interviewed 111 patients referred to our elective outpatient service and whose first appointments had been cancelled as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results. Patients reported significant impacts on their health status and quality of life. Overall, 79 (71.2%) patients reported a further deterioration in their condition while waiting, with seven (6.3%) evaluating their health status as ‘worse than death’. Conclusions. Waiting lists are clearly not benign and how to prioritize patients, their level of need, and access to assessment and treatment must be more sophisticated than simply relying on the length of time a patient has been waiting. This paper supports the contention that patients awaiting elective joint arthroplasty report significant impacts on their quality of life and health status. This should be given appropriate weight when patients are prioritized for surgery as part of the recovery of services following the COVID-19 pandemic. Elective surgery should not be seen as optional surgery—patients do not see it in this way

The December 2023 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Tissue integration and chondroprotective potential of acetabular labral augmentation with autograft tendon: study of a porcine model; The Irish National Orthopaedic Register under cyberattack: what happened, and what were the consequences?; An overview of machine learning in orthopaedic surgery: an educational paper; Beware of the fungus…; New evidence for COVID-19 in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery

Aims. COVID-19-related patient care delays have resulted in an unprecedented patient care backlog in the field of orthopaedics. The objective of this study is to examine orthopaedic provider preferences regarding the patient care backlog and financial recovery initiatives in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. An orthopaedic research consortium at a multi-hospital tertiary care academic medical system developed a three-part survey examining provider perspectives on strategies to expand orthopaedic patient care and financial recovery. Section 1 asked for preferences regarding extending clinic hours, section 2 assessed surgeon opinions on expanding surgical opportunities, and section 3 questioned preferred strategies for departmental financial recovery. The survey was sent to the institution’s surgical and nonoperative orthopaedic providers. Results. In all, 73 of 75 operative (n = 55) and nonoperative (n = 18) providers responded to the survey. A total of 92% of orthopaedic providers (n = 67) were willing to extend clinic hours. Most providers preferred extending clinic schedule until 6pm on weekdays. When asked about extending surgical block hours, 96% of the surgeons (n = 53) were willing to extend operating room (OR) block times. Most surgeons preferred block times to be extended until 7pm (63.6%, n = 35). A majority of surgeons (53%, n = 29) believe that over 50% of their surgical cases could be performed at an ambulatory surgery centre (ASC). Of the strategies to address departmental financial deficits, 85% of providers (n = 72) were willing to work extra hours without a pay cut. Conclusion. Most orthopaedic providers are willing to help with patient care backlogs and revenue recovery by working extended hours instead of having their pay reduced. These findings provide insights that can be incorporated into COVID-19 recovery strategies. Level of Evidence: III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):562–568

Aims. Hip fracture is a common condition of the older, frailer person. This population is also at risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is important to understand the impact of coexistent hip fracture and SARS-CoV-2 for informed decision-making at patient and service levels. Methods. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies of older (> 60 years) people with fragility hip fractures and outcomes with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was early (30-day or in-hospital) mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and key clinical characteristics known to be associated with outcomes after hip fracture. Results. A total of 14 cohort and five case series studies were included (692 SARS-CoV-2 positive, 2,585 SARS-CoV-2 negative). SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an overall risk ratio (RR) for early mortality of 4.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.42 to 5.82). Early mortality was 34% (95% CI 30% to 38%) and 9% (95% CI 8% to 10%) in the infected and noninfected groups respectively. Length of stay was increased in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (mean difference (MD) 5.2 days (3.2 to 7.2)). Age (MD 1.6 years (0.3 to 2.9)); female sex (RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05)); admission from home (RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.00)); presence of dementia (RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.43)); and intracapsular fracture (RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.11)) were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were statistically, but not clinically, significantly greater Nottingham Hip Fracture Scores in infected compared with non-infected patients (MD 0.7 (0.4 to 0.9)). Conclusion. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with worse outcomes after hip fracture. This is not explained by differences in patient characteristics. These data can be used to support informed decision-making and may help track the impact of widespread adoption of system-level and therapeutic changes in management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):314–322

The June 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Machine learning did not outperform conventional competing risk modelling to predict revision arthroplasty; Unravelling the risks: incidence and reoperation rates for femoral fractures post-total hip arthroplasty; Spinal versus general anaesthesia for hip arthroscopy: a COVID-19 pandemic- and opioid epidemic-driven study; Development and validation of a deep-learning model to predict total hip arthroplasty on radiographs; Ambulatory centres lead in same-day hip and knee arthroplasty success; Exploring the impact of smokeless tobacco on total hip arthroplasty outcomes: a deeper dive into postoperative complications

Shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) is a prolonged episode of shoulder dysfunction that commences within 24 to 48 hours of a vaccination. Symptoms include a combination of shoulder pain, stiffness, and weakness. There has been a recent rapid increase in reported cases of SIRVA within the literature, particularly in adults, and is likely related to the mass vaccination programmes associated with COVID-19 and influenza. The pathophysiology is not certain, but placement of the vaccination in the subdeltoid bursa or other pericapsular tissue has been suggested to result in an inflammatory capsular process. It has been hypothesized that this is associated with a vaccine injection site that is “too high” and predisposes to the development of SIRVA. Nerve conduction studies are routinely normal, but further imaging can reveal deep-deltoid collections, rotator cuff tendinopathy and tears, or subacromial subdeltoid bursitis. However, all of these are common findings within a general asymptomatic population. Medicolegal claims in the UK, based on an incorrect injection site, are unlikely to meet the legal threshold to determine liability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):839–842

Aims. This observational study examines the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic upon the paediatric trauma burden of a district general hospital. We aim to compare the nature and volume of the paediatric trauma during the first 2020 UK lockdown period with the same period in 2019. Methods. Prospective data was collected from 23 March 2020 to 14 June 2020 and compared with retrospective data collected from 23 March 2019 to 14 June 2019. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, nature of the injury, and details of any surgery were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the independent-samples t-test for normally distributed data and the Mann-Whitney-U test for non-parametric data. Additionally, patients were contacted by telephone to further explore the mechanism of injury where required, to gain some qualitative insight into the risk factors for injury. Results. The 2020 lockdown resulted in 30% fewer paediatric trauma presentations (441 vs 306), but no significant change in the number of patients requiring surgery (47 vs 51; p = 0.686). Trampolining injuries increased in absolute numbers by 168% (p < 0.001), almost four times more common when considered as percentage of all injuries observed in 2020 vs 2019. There was a decrease in high energy trauma from road traffic accidents and falls from height (21.5% decrease, p < 0.001). Despite a shift towards more conservative treatment options, trampolining injuries continued to require surgery in similar proportions (19.4 vs 20%; p = 0.708). Qualitative investigation revealed that the most common risk factor for trampolining injury was concurrent usage, especially with an older child. Conclusion. COVID-19 lockdown has resulted in a decrease in paediatric orthopaedic presentations and high energy trauma. However, due to a marked increase in home trampolining injuries, and their unchanged requirement for surgery, there has been no change in the requirement for surgery during the lockdown period. As home exercise becomes more prevalent, a duty of public health falls upon clinicians to advise parents against trampoline usage. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):86–92

Virtual encounters have experienced an exponential rise amid the current COVID-19 crisis. This abrupt change, seen in response to unprecedented medical and environmental challenges, has been forced upon the orthopaedic community. However, such changes to adopting virtual care and technology were already in the evolution forecast, albeit in an unpredictable timetable impeded by regulatory and financial barriers. This adoption is not meant to replace, but rather augment established, traditional models of care while ensuring patient/provider safety, especially during the pandemic. While our department, like those of other institutions, has performed virtual care for several years, it represented a small fraction of daily care. The pandemic required an accelerated and comprehensive approach to the new reality. Contemporary literature has already shown equivalent safety and patient satisfaction, as well as superior efficiency and reduced expenses with musculoskeletal virtual care (MSKVC) versus traditional models. Nevertheless, current literature detailing operational models of MSKVC is scarce. The current review describes our pre-pandemic MSKVC model and the shift to a MSKVC pandemic workflow that enumerates the conceptual workflow organization (patient triage, from timely care provision based on symptom acuity/severity to a continuum that includes future follow-up). Furthermore, specific setup requirements (both resource/personnel requirements such as hardware, software, and network connectivity requirements, and patient/provider characteristics respectively), and professional expectations are outlined. MSKVC has already become a pivotal element of musculoskeletal care, due to COVID-19, and these changes are confidently here to stay. Readiness to adapt and evolve will be required of individual musculoskeletal clinical teams as well as organizations, as established paradigms evolve. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:272–280

Aims. The purpose of our study was to determine which groups of orthopaedic providers favour virtual care, and analyze overall orthopaedic provider perceptions of virtual care. We hypothesize that providers with less clinical experience will favour virtual care, and that orthopaedic providers overall will show increased preference for virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic and decreased preference during non-pandemic circumstances. Methods. An orthopaedic research consortium at an academic medical system developed a survey examining provider perspectives regarding orthopaedic virtual care. Survey items were scored on a 1 to 5 Likert scale (1 = “strongly disagree”, 5 = “strongly agree”) and compared using nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. Results. Providers with less experience were more likely to recommend virtual care for follow-up visits (3.61 on the Likert scale (SD 0.95) vs 2.90 (SD 1.23); p = 0.006) and feel that virtual care was essential to patient wellbeing (3.98 (SD 0.95) vs 3.00 (SD 1.16); p < 0.001) during the pandemic. Less experienced providers also viewed virtual visits as providing a similar level of care as in-person visits (2.41 (SD 1.02) vs 1.76 (SD 0.87); p = 0.006) and more time-efficient than in-person visits (3.07 (SD 1.19) vs 2.34 (SD 1.14); p = 0.012) in non-pandemic circumstances. During the pandemic, most providers viewed virtual care as effective in providing essential care (83.6%, n = 51) and wanted to schedule patients for virtual care follow-up (82.2%, n = 50); only 10.9% (n = 8) of providers preferred virtual visits in non-pandemic circumstances. Conclusion. Orthopaedic providers with less clinical experience seem to favourably view virtual care both during the pandemic and under non-pandemic circumstances. Providers in general appear to view virtual care positively during the pandemic but are less accommodating towards it in non-pandemic circumstances. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(6):405–410

Aims. Displaced distal radius fractures were investigated at a level 1 major trauma centre during the COVID-19 2020 lockdown due to the implementation of temporary changes in practice. The primary aim was to establish if follow-up at one week in place of the 72-hour British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma & Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidance was safe following manipulation under anaesthetic. A parallel adaptation during lockdown was the non-expectation of Bier’s block. The secondary aim was to compare clinical outcomes with respect to block type. Methods. Overall, 90 patients were assessed in a cross-sectional cohort study using a mixed, retrospective-prospective approach. Consecutive sampling of 30 patients pre-lockdown (P1), 30 during lockdown (P2), and 30 during post-lockdown (P3) was applied. Type of block, operative status, follow-up, and complications were extracted. Primary endpoints were early complications (≤ one week). Secondary endpoints were later complications including malunion, delayed union or osteotomy. Results. In P1, 86.6% of patients were seen between days one to three, 26.7% in P2, and 56.7% in P3. There were no documented complications from days one to three. Operative rate was 35.5%, which did not vary significantly (p= 0.712). Primary endpoints occurred between day four to seven, and included one patient each period treated for plaster cast pain. Secondary endpoints in P1 included delayed union (one patient). During P2, this included malunion (one patient), a pressure sore (one patient) and ulnar cutaneous nerve symptoms (two patients). In P3, malunion was identified in one patient. Mean follow-up was six months (4 to 9) with union rate 96%. Change in block practice varied significantly (p =＜0.05). The risk ratio of complications using regional block (Bier’s) over haematoma block was 0.65. Conclusion. Follow-up adaptations during lockdown did not adversely affect patient outcomes. Regional anaesthesia is gold standard for manipulation of displaced distal radial fractures. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):338–343

Aims. Open reduction in developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is regularly performed despite screening programmes, due to failure of treatment or late presentation. A protocol for open reduction of DDH has been refined through collaboration between surgical, anaesthetic, and nursing teams to allow same day discharge. The objective of this study was to determine the safety and feasibility of performing open reduction of DDH as a day case. Methods. A prospectively collected departmental database was visited. All consecutive surgical cases of DDH between June 2015 and March 2020 were collected. Closed reductions, bilateral cases, cases requiring corrective osteotomy, and children with comorbidities were excluded. Data collected included demographics, safety outcome measures (blood loss, complications, readmission, reduction confirmation), and feasibility for discharge according to the Face Legs Activity Cry Consolidability (FLACC) pain scale. A satisfaction questionnaire was filled by the carers. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Results. Out of 168 consecutive DDH cases, 16 patients fit the inclusion criteria (age range 10 to 26 months, 13 female). Intraoperative blood loss ranged from "minimal" to 120 ml, and there were no complications or readmissions. The FLACC score was 0 for all patients. The carers satisfaction questionnaire expressed high satisfaction from the experience with adequate information and support provided. Conclusion. Open reduction in DDH, without corrective osteotomy, is safe and feasible to be managed as a day case procedure. It requires a clear treatment pathway, analgesia, sufficient counselling, and communication with carers. It is even more important during the COVID-19 pandemic when reduced length of hospital stay is likely to be safer for both patient and their parents. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2021;2(4):271–277

Aims. To determine the impact of COVID-19 on orthopaediatric admissions and fracture clinics within a regional integrated care system (ICS). Methods. A retrospective review was performed for all paediatric orthopaedic patients admitted across the region during the recent lockdown period (24 March 2020 to 10 May 2020) and the same period in 2019. Age, sex, mechanism, anatomical region, and treatment modality were compared, as were fracture clinic attendances within the receiving regional major trauma centre (MTC) between the two periods. Results. Paediatric trauma admissions across the region fell by 33% (197 vs 132) with a proportional increase to 59% (n = 78) of admissions to the MTC during lockdown compared with 28.4% in 2019 (N = 56). There was a reduction in manipulation under anaesthetic (p = 0.015) and the use of Kirschner wires (K-wires) (p = 0.040) between the two time periods. The median time to surgery remained one day in both (2019 IQR 0 to 2; 2020 IQR 1 to 1). Supracondylar fractures were the most common reason for fracture clinic attendance (17.3%, n = 19) with a proportional increase of 108.4% vs 2019 (2019 n = 20; 2020 n = 19) (p = 0.007). While upper limb injuries and falls from play apparatus, equipment, or height remained the most common indications for admission, there was a reduction in sports injuries (p < 0.001) but an increase in lacerations (p = 0.031). Fracture clinic management changed with 67% (n = 40) of follow-up appointments via telephone and 69% (n = 65) of patients requiring cast immobilization treated with a 3M Soft Cast, enabling self-removal. The safeguarding team saw a 22% reduction in referrals (2019: n = 41, 2020: n = 32). Conclusion. During this viral pandemic, the number of trauma cases decreased with a change in the mechanism of injury, median age of presentation, and an increase in referrals to the regional MTC. Adaptions in standard practice led to fewer MUA, and K-wire procedures being performed, more supracondylar fractures managed through clinic and an increase in the use of removable cast. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-7:424–430

Aims. The current global pandemic due to COVID-19 is generating significant burden on the health service in the UK. On 23 March 2020, the UK government issued requirements for a national lockdown. The aim of this multicentre study is to gain a greater understanding of the impact lockdown has had on the rates, mechanisms and types of injuries together with their management across a regional trauma service. Methods. Data was collected from an adult major trauma centre, paediatric major trauma centre, district general hospital, and a regional hand trauma unit. Data collection included patient demographics, injury mechanism, injury type and treatment required. Time periods studied corresponded with the two weeks leading up to lockdown in the UK, two weeks during lockdown, and the same two-week period in 2019. Results. There was a 55.7% (12,935 vs 5,733) reduction in total accident and emergency (A&E) attendances with a 53.7% (354 vs 164) reduction in trauma admissions during lockdown compared to 2019. The number of patients with fragility fractures requiring admission remained constant (32 patients in 2019 vs 31 patients during lockdown; p > 0.05). Road traffic collisions (57.1%, n = 8) were the commonest cause of major trauma admissions during lockdown. There was a significant increase in DIY related-hand injuries (26% (n = 13)) lockdown vs 8% (n = 11 in 2019, p = 0.006) during lockdown, which resulted in an increase in nerve injuries (12% (n = 6 in lockdown) vs 2.5% (n = 3 in 2019, p = 0.015) and hand infections (24% (n = 12) in lockdown vs 6.2% (n = 8) in 2019, p = 0.002). Conclusion. The national lockdown has dramatically reduced orthopaedic trauma admissions. The incidence of fragility fractures requiring surgery has not changed. Appropriate provision in theatres should remain in place to ensure these patients can be managed as a surgical priority. DIY-related hand injuries have increased which has led to an increased in nerve injuries requiring intervention

Aims

To achieve expert clinical consensus in the delivery of hydrodilatation for the treatment of primary frozen shoulder to inform clinical practice and the design of an intervention for evaluation.