In May 2012, in airports across the globe, seven orthopaedic surgeons bravely said goodbye to their loved ones, and slowly turned towards their respective aircraft. Filled with expectation and mild trepidation they stepped into the unknown… the ABC fellowship of 2012.

Objectives

Patient function after arthroplasty should ideally quickly improve. It is not known which peri-operative function assessments predict length of stay (LOS) and short-term functional recovery. The objective of this study was to identify peri-operative functions assessments predictive of hospital LOS and short-term function after hospital discharge in hip or knee arthroplasty patients.

We report the results of six trauma and orthopaedic projects to Kenya in the last three years. The aims are to deliver both a trauma service and teaching within two hospitals; one a district hospital near Mount Kenya in Nanyuki, the other the largest public hospital in Kenya in Mombasa. The Kenya Orthopaedic Project team consists of a wide range of multidisciplinary professionals that allows the experience to be shared across those specialties. A follow-up clinic is held three months after each mission to review the patients. To our knowledge there are no reported outcomes in the literature for similar projects.

A total of 211 operations have been performed and 400 patients seen during the projects. Most cases were fractures of the lower limb; we have been able to follow up 163 patients (77%) who underwent surgical treatment. We reflect on the results so far and discuss potential improvements for future missions.

Satisfaction with care is important to both patients and to those who pay for it. The Net Promoter Score (NPS), widely used in the service industries, has been introduced into the NHS as the ‘friends and family test’; an overarching measure of patient satisfaction. It assesses the likelihood of the patient recommending the healthcare received to another, and is seen as a discriminator of healthcare performance. We prospectively assessed 6186 individuals undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement at a single university hospital to determine the Net Promoter Score for joint replacements and to evaluate which factors contributed to the response.

Achieving pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, confidence interval (CI) 1.83 to 2.49), the meeting of pre-operative expectation (OR 2.57, CI 2.24 to 2.97), and the hospital experience (OR 2.33, CI 2.03 to 2.68) are the domains that explain whether a patient would recommend joint replacement services. These three factors, combined with the type of surgery undertaken (OR 2.31, CI 1.68 to 3.17), drove a predictive model that was able to explain 95% of the variation in the patient’s recommendation response. Though intuitively similar, this ‘recommendation’ metric was found to be materially different to satisfaction responses. The difference between THR (NPS 71) and TKR (NPS 49) suggests that no overarching score for a department should be used without an adjustment for case mix. However, the Net Promoter Score does measure a further important dimension to our existing metrics: the patient experience of healthcare delivery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:622–8.

This is the second of a series of reviews of registries. This review looks specifically at worldwide registry data that have been collected on knee arthroplasty, what we have learned from their reports, and what the limitations are as to what we currently know.

The December 2013 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Conflict of interest and hyaluronic acid; Will time indeed tell in microfracture?; Contralateral knee pain and joint replacement outcomes; Patient satisfaction and knee replacement?; Hope in the cytokines for painful TKRs?; Pain severity, cytokines and osteoarthritis?; Quadriceps weakness and pain; and spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee

Valid and reliable techniques for assessing performance are essential to surgical education, especially with the emergence of competency-based frameworks. Despite this, there is a paucity of adequate tools for the evaluation of skills required during joint replacement surgery. In this scoping review, we examine current methods for assessing surgeons’ competency in joint replacement procedures in both simulated and clinical environments. The ability of many of the tools currently in use to make valid, reliable and comprehensive assessments of performance is unclear. Furthermore, many simulation-based assessments have been criticised for a lack of transferability to the clinical setting. It is imperative that more effective methods of assessment are developed and implemented in order to improve our ability to evaluate the performance of skills relating to total joint replacement. This will enable educators to provide formative feedback to learners throughout the training process to ensure that they have attained core competencies upon completion of their training. This should help ensure positive patient outcomes as the surgical trainees enter independent practice.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1445–9.

Stem cells are a key component of regenerative medicine strategies. Particular areas of musculoskeletal application include cartilage and bone regeneration in arthritis and trauma. There are several types of stem cell and this article will focus on the adult derived cells. The review includes current issues and future developments.

Staphylococcus aureus is one of the leading causes of surgical site infection (SSI). Over the past decade there has been an increase in methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). This is a subpopulation of the bacterium with unique resistance and virulence characteristics. Nasal colonisation with either S. aureus or MRSA has been demonstrated to be an important independent risk factor associated with the increasing incidence and severity of SSI after orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, there is an economic burden related to SSI following orthopaedic surgery, with MRSA-associated SSI leading to longer hospital stays and increased hospital costs. Although there is some controversy about the effectiveness of screening and eradication programmes, the literature suggests that patients should be screened and MRSA-positive patients treated before surgical admission in order to reduce the risk of SSI.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:4–9.

Objectives

The aims of this piece of work were to: 1) record the background concentrations of blood chromium (Cr) and cobalt (Co) concentrations in a large group of subjects; 2) to compare blood/serum Cr and Co concentrations with retrieved metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacings; 3) to examine the distribution of Co and Cr in the serum and whole blood of patients with MoM hip arthroplasties; and 4) to further understand the partitioning of metal ions between the serum and whole blood fractions.

Using data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register, 8639 cemented and 2477 uncemented primary hemiarthroplasties for displaced fractures of the femoral neck in patients aged > 70 years were included in a prospective observational study. A total of 218 re-operations were performed after cemented and 128 after uncemented procedures. Survival of the hemiarthroplasties was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard rate ratios (HRR) for revision were calculated using Cox regression analyses. At five years the implant survival was 97% (95% confidence interval (CI) 97 to 97) for cemented and 91% (95% CI 87 to 94) for uncemented hemiarthroplasties. Uncemented hemiarthroplasties had a 2.1 times increased risk of revision compared with cemented prostheses (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.6, p < 0.001). The increased risk was mainly caused by revisions for peri-prosthetic fracture (HRR = 17), aseptic loosening (HRR = 17), haematoma formation (HRR = 5.3), superficial infection (HRR = 4.6) and dislocation (HRR = 1.8). More intra-operative complications, including intra-operative death, were reported for the cemented hemiarthroplasties. However, in a time-dependent analysis, the HRR for re-operation in both groups increased as follow-up increased.

This study showed that the risk for revision was higher for uncemented than for cemented hemiarthroplasties.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to assess functional outcome and patient satisfaction. They provide a framework for comparisons between surgical units, and individual surgeons for benchmarking and financial remuneration. Better performance may bring the reward of more customers as patients and commissioners seek out high performers for their elective procedures. Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data linked to PROMs we identified 22 691 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) undertaken for osteoarthritis in England and Wales between August 2008 and February 2011, and identified the surgical factors that influenced the improvements in the Oxford knee score (OKS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) assessment using multiple regression analysis. After correction for patient factors the only surgical factors that influenced PROMs were implant brand and hospital type (both p < 0.001). However, the effects of surgical factors upon the PROMs were modest compared with patient factors. For both the OKS and the EQ-5D the most important factors influencing the improvement in PROMs were the corresponding pre-operative score and the patient’s general health status. Despite having only a small effect on PROMs, this study has shown that both implant brand and hospital type do influence reported subjective functional scores following TKR. In the current climate of financial austerity, proposed performance-based remuneration and wider patient choice, it would seem unwise to ignore these effects and the influence of a range of additional patient factors.

Orthopaedic surgery is in an exciting transitional period as modern surgical interventions, implants and scientific developments are providing new therapeutic options. As advances in basic science and technology improve our understanding of the pathology and repair of musculoskeletal tissue, traditional operations may be replaced by newer, less invasive procedures which are more appropriately targeted at the underlying pathophysiology. However, evidence-based practice will remain a basic requirement of care. Orthopaedic surgeons can and should remain at the forefront of the development of novel therapeutic interventions and their application. Progression of the potential of bench research into an improved array of orthopaedic treatments in an effective yet safe manner will require the development of a subgroup of specialists with extended training in research to play an important role in bridging the gap between laboratory science and clinical practice. International regulations regarding the introduction of new biological treatments will place an additional burden on the mechanisms of this translational process, and orthopaedic surgeons who are trained in science, surgery and the regulatory environment will be essential. Training and supporting individuals with these skills requires special consideration and discussion by the orthopaedic community.

In this paper we review some traditional approaches to the integration of orthopaedic science and surgery, the therapeutic potential of current regenerative biomedical science for cartilage repair and ways in which we may develop surgeons with the skills required to translate scientific discovery into effective and properly assessed orthopaedic treatments.

We analysed which pre-operative factors could be used to predict the length of in-patient stay following unilateral primary total hip replacement undertaken for osteoarthritis. Data were collected prospectively from 2302 patients undergoing primary total hip replacement over a nine-year period. The relationships between the various pre-operative factors and length of stay were studied separately using either Student’s t-test or Pearson’s correlation, and then subjected to multiple linear regression analysis.

The mean length of stay was 8.1 days (median 7; 3 to 58). After adjusting for the effects of other pre-operative factors, younger age, male gender, higher combined Harris hip function and activity score, higher general health perception dimension of the Short-Form 36 score, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use were all found to be significantly associated with a reduced length of stay.

National guidelines state that in patients undergoing operations the site of the procedure should be marked. In clinical practice the same marker is used repeatedly. We are not aware of any investigation regarding the theoretical risk of transferring organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphyloccocus aureus (MRSA) between patients by a skin marker.

In an experimental setting, Penflex and Viomedex skin markers were tested 30 times each after contaminating them with a standard inoculum of MRSA. The survival of the organism on the tip of the markers was assessed by culture on MRSA-indicator nutrient agar plates at 0, 5, 15 and 60 minutes, 24 and 48 hours and at 1, 2, and 3 weeks after contamination.

There was a significant difference between the markers, with the Penflex showing no survival of MRSA after 15 minutes whereas the Viomedex product continued to produce MRSA cultures for up to three weeks.

As of April 2010 all NHS institutions in the United Kingdom are required to publish data on surgical site infection, but the method for collecting this has not been decided. We examined 7448 trauma and orthopaedic surgical wounds made in patients staying for at least two nights between 2000 and 2008 at our institution and calculated the rate of surgical site infection using three definitions: the US Centers for Disease Control, the United Kingdom Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme and the ASEPSIS system. On the same series of wounds, the infection rate with outpatient follow-up according to Centre for Disease Control was 15.45%, according to the UK Nosocomial infection surveillance was 11.32%, and according to ASEPSIS was 8.79%. These figures highlight the necessity for all institutions to use the same method for diagnosing surgical site infection.

If different methods are used, direct comparisons will be invalid and published rates of infection will be misleading.