Aims

To evaluate if, for orthopaedic trainees, additional cadaveric simulation training or standard training alone yields superior radiological and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation or hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture.

Objectives. The PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation (PROFHER) trial has recently demonstrated that surgery is non-superior to non-operative treatment in the management of displaced proximal humeral fractures. The objective of this study was to assess current surgical practice in the context of the PROFHER trial in terms of patient demographics, injury characteristics and the nature of the surgical treatment. Methods. A total of ten consecutive patients undergoing surgery for the treatment of a proximal humeral fracture from each of 11 United Kingdom hospitals were retrospectively identified over a 15 month period between January 2014 and March 2015. Data gathered for the 110 patients included patient demographics, injury characteristics, mode of surgical fixation, the grade of operating surgeon and the cost of the surgical implants. Results. A majority of the patients were female (66%, 73 of 110). The mean patient age was 62 years (range 18 to 89). A majority of patients met the inclusion criteria for the PROFHER trial (75%, 83 of 110). Plate fixation was the most common mode of surgery (68%, 75 patients), followed by intramedullary fixation (12%, 13 patients), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (10%, 11 patients) and hemiarthroplasty (7%, eight patients). The consultant was either the primary operating surgeon or supervising the operating surgeon in a large majority of cases (91%, 100 patients). Implant costs for plate fixation were significantly less than both hemiarthroplasty (p < 0.05) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (p < 0.0001). Implant costs for intramedullary fixation were significantly less than plate fixation (p < 0.01), hemiarthroplasty (p < 0.0001) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Our study has shown that the majority of a representative sample of patients currently undergoing surgical treatment for a proximal humeral fracture in these United Kingdom centres met the inclusion criteria for the PROFHER trial and that a proportion of these patients may, therefore, have been effectively managed non-operatively. Cite this article: Mr B. J. F. Dean. A review of current surgical practice in the operative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: Does the PROFHER trial demonstrate a need for change? Bone Joint Res 2016;5:178–184. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.55.2000596

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical results of operative intervention for femoral metastases which were selected based on expected survival and to discuss appropriate surgical strategies. Methods. From 2002 to 2017, 148 consecutive patients undergoing surgery for femoral metastasis were included in this study. Prognostic risk assessments were performed according to the Katagiri and revised Katagiri scoring system. In general, the low-risk group underwent resection and reconstruction with endoprosthetic replacement (EPR), while the high-risk group underwent internal fixation (IF) and radiation therapy. For the intermediate-risk group, the operative choice depended on the patient’s condition, degree of bone destruction, and radio-sensitivity. Overall survival, local failure, walking ability, and systemic complications were evaluated. Results. A total of 83 patients underwent EPR (low-risk, 23%; intermediate-risk, 60%; high-risk, 17%) and 65 patients underwent IF (low-risk, 0%; intermediate-risk, 32%; high-risk, 68%). The one-year survival rate was 71% for EPR and 15% for IF (p < 0.001). The one-year local failure-free survival was 93% for EPR and 67% for IF, and the two-year and five-year local failure-free survival for EPR were both 88% (p = 0.016). Although the ambulatory rate was 99% for EPR and 60% for IF, the median time to ambulation was shorter in the IF (EPR, 28 days, interquartile range (IQR) 25 to 35; IF, 23 days, IQR 18 to 28; p < 0.001) The cause of non ambulation was mainly due to progression of cancer (89%). The rate of systemic complications was comparable between the two groups (EPR, 18%; IF, 22%; p = 0.598). Conclusion. Selective use of EPR where survival is expected to be good offers correspondingly good long-term results. IF is less invasive with shorter treatment period, which is beneficial for patients with short-term expected survival. Prognosis is an important indicator in selecting operative procedures for femoral metastasis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):285–292

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of guided growth and varus osteotomy in treating Kalamchi type II avascular necrosis (AVN) after open reduction and Pemberton acetabuloplasty for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

Aims. A systematic literature review focusing on how long before surgery concurrent viral or bacterial infections (respiratory and urinary infections) should be treated in hip fracture patients, and if there is evidence for delaying this surgery. Methods. A total of 11 databases were examined using the COre, Standard, Ideal (COSI) protocol. Bibliographic searches (no chronological or linguistic restriction) were conducted using, among other methods, the Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) template. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for flow diagram and checklist. Final reading of the complete texts was conducted in English, French, and Spanish. Classification of papers was completed within five levels of evidence (LE). Results. There were a total of 621 hits (526 COre; 95 Standard, Ideal) for screening identification, and 107 records were screened. Overall 67 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 21 articles were included for the study question. A total of 46 full-text articles were excluded with reasons. No studies could be included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analyses), and there were many confounding variables including surgeons’ experience, prosthesis models used, and surgical technique. Conclusion. Patients with hip fracture and with a viral infection in the upper respiratory tract or without major clinical symptoms should be operated on as soon as possible (LE: I-III). There is no evidence that patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) should be treated differently. In relation to pneumonia, its prevention is a major issue. Antibiotics should be administered if surgery is delayed by > 72 hours or if bacterial infection is present in the lower respiratory tract (LE: III-V). In patients with hip fracture and urinary tract infection (UTI), delaying surgery may provoke further complications (LE: I). However, diabetic or immunocompromised patients may benefit from immediate antibiotic treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(12):884–893

Aims. Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, with surgical treatment being indicated for both. Whether arthroplasty of the hip or spinal surgery should be performed first remains uncertain. Materials and Methods. Clinical scenarios were devised for a survey asking the preferred order of surgery and the rationale for this decision for five fictional patients with both OA of the hip and degenerative lumbar disorders. These were symptomatic OA of the hip and: 1) lumbar spinal stenosis with neurological claudication; 2) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with leg pain; 3) lumbar disc herniation with leg weakness; 4) lumbar scoliosis with back pain; and 5) thoracolumbar disc herniation with myelopathy. This survey was sent to 110 members of The Hip Society and 101 members of the Scoliosis Research Society. The choices of the surgeons were compared among scenarios and between surgical specialties using the chi-squared test. The free-text comments were analyzed using text-mining. Results. Responses were received from 51 hip surgeons (46%) and 37 spine surgeons (37%). The percentages of hip surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ differed significantly among scenarios: 59% for scenario 1; 73% for scenario 2; 47% for scenario 3; 47% for scenario 4; and 10% for scenario 5 (p < 0.001). The percentages of spine surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ were 49% for scenario 1; 70% for scenario 2; 19% for scenario 3; 78% for scenario 4; and 0% for scenario 5. There were significant differences between the groups for scenarios 3 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘hip first’; p = 0.012) and 4 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘spine first’; p = 0.006). Conclusion. In patients with coexistent OA of the hip and degenerative disorders of the spine, the question of ‘hip or spinal surgery first’ elicits relatively consistent answers in some clinical scenarios, but remains controversial in others, even for experienced surgeons. The nature of neurological symptoms can influence surgeons’ decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):37–44

During the pandemic of COVID-19, some patients with COVID-19 may need emergency surgeries. As spine surgeons, it is our responsibility to ensure appropriate treatment to the patients with COVID-19 and spinal diseases. A protocol for spinal surgery and related management on patients with COVID-19 has been reviewed. Patient preparation for emergency surgeries, indications, and contraindications of emergency surgeries, operating room preparation, infection control precautions and personal protective equipments (PPE), anesthesia management, intraoperative procedures, postoperative management, medical waste disposal, and surveillance of healthcare workers were reviewed. It should be safe for surgeons with PPE of protection level 2 to perform spinal surgeries on patients with COVID-19. Standardized and careful surgical procedures should be necessary to reduce the exposure to COVID-19

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant challenges to healthcare systems across the globe in 2020. There were concerns surrounding early reports of increased mortality among patients undergoing emergency or non-urgent surgery. We report the morbidity and mortality in patients who underwent arthroplasty procedures during the UK first stage of the pandemic. Methods. Institutional review board approval was obtained for a review of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients who underwent arthroplasty procedures between March and May 2020 at a specialist orthopaedic centre in the UK. Data included diagnoses, comorbidities, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, length of stay, and complications. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and secondary outcomes were prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, medical and surgical complications, and readmission within 30 days of discharge. The data collated were compared with series from the preceding three months. Results. There were 167 elective procedures performed in the first three weeks of the study period, prior to the first national lockdown, and 57 emergency procedures thereafter. Three patients (1.3%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. There was one death (0.45%) due to SARS-CoV-2 infection after an emergency procedure. None of the patients developed complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection after elective arthroplasty. There was no observed spike in complications during in-hospital stay or in the early postoperative period. There was no statistically significant difference in survival between pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 groups (p = 0.624). We observed a higher number of emergency procedures performed during the pandemic within our institute. Conclusion. An international cohort has reported 30-day mortality as 28.8% following orthopaedic procedures during the pandemic. There are currently no reports on clinical outcomes of patients treated with lower limb reconstructive surgery during the same period. While an effective vaccine is developed and widely accepted, it is very likely that SARS-CoV2 infection remains endemic. We believe that this report will help guide future restoration planning here in the UK and abroad. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):323–329

Aims

This study assesses patient barriers to successful telemedicine care in orthopaedic practices in a large academic practice in the COVID-19 era.

Research into COVID-19 has been rapid in response to the dynamic global situation, which has resulted in heterogeneity of methodology and the communication of information. Adherence to reporting standards would improve the quality of evidence presented in future studies, and may ensure that findings could be interpreted in the context of the wider literature. The COVID-19 pandemic remains a dynamic situation, requiring continued assessment of the disease incidence and monitoring for the emergence of viral variants and their transmissibility, virulence, and susceptibility to vaccine-induced immunity. More work is needed to assess the long-term impact of COVID-19 infection on patients who sustain a hip fracture. The International Multicentre Project Auditing COVID-19 in Trauma & Orthopaedics (IMPACT) formed the largest multicentre collaborative audit conducted in orthopaedics in order to provide an emergency response to a global pandemic, but this was in the context of many vital established audit services being disrupted at an early stage, and it is crucial that these resources are protected during future health crises. Rapid data-sharing between regions should be developed, with wider adoption of the revised 2022 Fragility Fracture Network Minimum Common Data Set for Hip Fracture Audit, and a pragmatic approach to information governance processes in order to facilitate cooperation and meta-audit. This editorial aims to: 1) identify issues related to COVID-19 that require further research; 2) suggest reporting standards for studies of COVID-19 and other communicable diseases; 3) consider the requirement of new risk scores for hip fracture patients; and 4) present the lessons learned from IMPACT in order to inform future collaborative studies.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(6):342–345.

Introduction. There is widespread variation in the management of rare orthopaedic disease, in a large part owing to uncertainty. No individual surgeon or hospital is typically equipped to amass sufficient numbers of cases to draw robust conclusions from the information available to them. The programme of research will establish the British Orthopaedic Surgery Surveillance (BOSS) Study; a nationwide reporting structure for rare disease in orthopaedic surgery. Methods. The BOSS Study is a series of nationwide observational cohort studies of pre-specified orthopaedic disease. All relevant hospitals treating the disease are invited to contribute anonymised case details. Data will be collected digitally through REDCap, with an additional bespoke software solution used to regularly confirm case ascertainment, prompt follow-up reminders and identify potential missing cases from external sources of information (i.e. national administrative data). With their consent, patients will be invited to enrich the data collected by supplementing anonymised case data with patient reported outcomes. The study will primarily seek to calculate the incidence of the rare diseases under investigation, with 95% confidence intervals. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe the case mix, treatment variations and outcomes. Inferential statistical analysis may be used to analyze associations between presentation factors and outcomes. Types of analyses will be contingent on the disease under investigation. Discussion. This study builds upon other national rare disease supporting structures, particularly those in obstetrics and paediatric surgery. It is particularly focused on addressing the evidence base for quality and safety of surgery, and the design is influenced by the specifications of the IDEAL collaboration for the development of surgical research

Aims. Joint registries classify all further arthroplasty procedures to a knee with an existing partial arthroplasty as revision surgery, regardless of the actual procedure performed. Relatively minor procedures, including bearing exchanges, are classified in the same way as major operations requiring augments and stems. A new classification system is proposed to acknowledge and describe the detail of these procedures, which has implications for risk, recovery, and health economics. Methods. Classification categories were proposed by a surgical consensus group, then ranked by patients, according to perceived invasiveness and implications for recovery. In round one, 26 revision cases were classified by the consensus group. Results were tested for inter-rater reliability. In round two, four additional cases were added for clarity. Round three repeated the survey one month later, subject to inter- and intrarater reliability testing. In round four, five additional expert partial knee arthroplasty surgeons were asked to classify the 30 cases according to the proposed revision partial knee classification (RPKC) system. Results. Four classes were proposed: PR1, where no bone-implant interfaces are affected; PR2, where surgery does not include conversion to total knee arthroplasty, for example, a second partial arthroplasty to a native compartment; PR3, when a standard primary total knee prosthesis is used; and PR4 when revision components are necessary. Round one resulted in 92% inter-rater agreement (Kendall’s W 0.97; p < 0.005), rising to 93% in round two (Kendall’s W 0.98; p < 0.001). Round three demonstrated 97% agreement (Kendall’s W 0.98; p < 0.001), with high intra-rater reliability (interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 0.99). Round four resulted in 80% agreement (Kendall’s W 0.92; p < 0.001). Conclusion. The RPKC system accounts for all procedures which may be appropriate following partial knee arthroplasty. It has been shown to be reliable, repeatable and pragmatic. The implications for patient care and health economics are discussed. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):638–645

Aims. To identify the prevalence of neuropathic pain after lower limb fracture surgery, assess associations with pain severity, quality of life and disability, and determine baseline predictors of chronic neuropathic pain at three and at six months post-injury. Methods. Secondary analysis of a UK multicentre randomized controlled trial (Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma; WHiST) dataset including adults aged 16 years or over following surgery for lower limb major trauma. The trial recruited 1,547 participants from 24 trauma centres. Neuropathic pain was measured at three and six months using the Doleur Neuropathique Questionnaire (DN4); 701 participants provided a DN4 score at three months and 781 at six months. Overall, 933 participants provided DN4 for at least one time point. Physical disability (Disability Rating Index (DRI) 0 to 100) and health-related quality-of-life (EuroQol five-dimension five-level; EQ-5D-5L) were measured. Candidate predictors of neuropathic pain included sex, age, BMI, injury mechanism, concurrent injury, diabetes, smoking, alcohol, analgaesia use pre-injury, index surgery location, fixation type, Injury Severity Score, open injury, and wound care. Results. The median age of the participants was 51 years (interquartile range 35 to 64). At three and six months post-injury respectively, 32% (222/702) and 30% (234/787) had neuropathic pain, 56% (396/702) and 53% (413/787) had chronic pain without neuropathic characteristics, and the remainder were pain-free. Pain severity was higher among those with neuropathic pain. Linear regression analyses found that those with neuropathic pain at six months post-injury had more physical disability (DRI adjusted mean difference 11.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.84 to 15.14; p < 0.001) and poorer quality of life (EQ-5D utility -0.15 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.11); p < 0.001) compared to those without neuropathic characteristics. Logistic regression identified that prognostic factors of younger age, current smoker, below knee fracture, concurrent injuries, and regular analgaesia pre-injury were associated with higher odds of post-injury neuropathic pain. Conclusion. Pain with neuropathic characteristics is common after lower limb fracture surgery and persists to six months post-injury. Persistent neuropathic pain is associated with substantially poorer recovery. Further attention to identify neuropathic pain post-lower limb injury, predicting patients at risk, and targeting interventions, is indicated. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1047–1054

Aims. Due to the complex anatomy of the pelvis, limb-sparing resections of pelvic tumours achieving adequate surgical margins, can often be difficult. The advent of computer navigation has improved the precision of resection of these lesions, though there is little evidence comparing resection with or without the assistance of navigation. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of navigation-assisted surgery for the resection of pelvic bone tumours involving the posterior ilium and sacrum. . Patients and Methods. Using our prospectively updated institutional database, we conducted a retrospective case control study of 21 patients who underwent resection of the posterior ilium and sacrum, for the treatment of a primary sarcoma of bone, between 1987 and 2015. The resection was performed with the assistance of navigation in nine patients and without navigation in 12. We assessed the accuracy of navigation-assisted surgery, as defined by the surgical margin and how this affects the rate of local recurrence, the disease-free survival and the effects on peri-and post-operative morbidity. . Results. The mean age of the patients was 36.4 years (15 to 66). The mean size of the tumour was 10.9 cm. In the navigation-assisted group, the margin was wide in two patients (16.7%), marginal in six (66.7%) and wide-contaminated in one (11.1%) with no intralesional margin. In the non-navigated-assisted group; the margin was wide in two patients (16.7%), marginal in five (41.7%), intralesional in three (25.0%) and wide-contaminated in two (16.7%). Local recurrence occurred in two patients in the navigation-assisted group (22.2%) and six in the non-navigation-assisted group (50.0%). The disease-free survival was significantly better when operated with navigation-assistance (p = 0.048). The blood loss and operating time were less in the navigated-assisted group, as was the risk of a foot drop post-operatively. Conclusion . The introduction of navigation-assisted surgery for the resection of tumours of the posterior ilium and sacrum has increased the safety for the patients and allows for a better oncological outcome. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:261–6

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that a single dose of tranexamic acid (TXA) would reduce blood loss and transfusion rates in elderly patients undergoing surgery for a subcapital or intertrochanteric (IT) fracture of the hip. Methods. In this single-centre, randomized controlled trial, elderly patients undergoing surgery for a hip fracture, either hemiarthroplasty for a subcapital fracture or intramedullary nailing for an IT fracture, were screened for inclusion. Patients were randomly allocated to a study group using a sealed envelope. The TXA group consisted of 77 patients, (35 with a subcapital fracture and 42 with an IT fracture), and the control group consisted of 88 patients (29 with a subcapital fracture and 59 with an IT fracture). One dose of 15 mg/kg of intravenous (IV) TXA diluted in 100 ml normal saline (NS,) or one dose of IV placebo 100 ml NS were administered before the incision was made. The haemoglobin (Hb) concentration was measured before surgery and daily until the fourth postoperative day. The primary outcomes were the total blood loss and the rate of transfusion from the time of surgery to the fourth postoperative day. Results. Homogeneity with respect to baseline characteristics was ensured between groups. The mean total blood loss was significantly lower in patients who received TXA (902.4 ml (-279.9 to 2,156.9) vs 1,226.3 ml (-269.7 to 3,429.7); p = 0.003), while the likelihood of requiring a transfusion of at least one unit of red blood cells was reduced by 22%. Subgroup analysis showed that these differences were larger in patients who had an IT fracture compared with those who had a subcapital fracture. Conclusion. Elderly patients who undergo intramedullary nailing for an IT fracture can benefit from a single dose of 15 mg/kg TXA before the onset of surgery. A similar tendency was identified in patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty for a subcapital fracture but not to a statistically significant level. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):442–448

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify factors that determine outcomes of treatment for patients with chondroblastic osteosarcomas (COS) of the limbs and pelvis.

Aims. The aim of this study was to explore whether time to surgery affects functional outcome in displaced proximal humeral fractures. Methods. A total of 250 patients presenting within three weeks of sustaining a displaced proximal humeral fracture involving the surgical neck were recruited at 32 acute NHS hospitals in the United Kingdom between September 2008 and April 2011. Of the 125 participants, 109 received surgery (fracture fixation or humeral head replacement) as per randomization. Data were included for 101 and 67 participants at six-month and five-year follow-up, respectively. Oxford Shoulder Scores (OSS) collected at six, 12, and 24 months and at three, four, and five years following randomization was plotted against time to surgery. Long-term recovery was explored by plotting six-month scores against five-year scores and agreement was illustrated with a Bland-Altman plot. Results. The mean time from initial trauma to surgery was 10.5 days (1 to 33). Earlier surgical intervention did not improve OSS throughout follow-up, nor when stratified by participant age (< 65 years vs ≥ 65 years) and fracture severity (one- and two-part vs three- and four-part fractures). Participants managed later than reported international averages (three days in the United States and Germany, eight days in the United Kingdom) did not have worse outcomes. At five-year follow-up, 50 participants (76%) had the same or improved OSS compared with six months (six-month mean OSS 35.8 (SD 10.0); five-year mean OSS 40.1 (SD 9.1); r = 0.613). A Bland-Altman plot demonstrated a positive mean difference (3.3 OSS points (SD 7.92)) with wide 95% limits of agreement (-12.2 and 18.8 points). Conclusion. Timing of surgery did not affect OSS at any stage of follow-up, irrespective of age or fracture type. Most participants had maximum functional outcome at six months that was maintained at five years. These findings may help guide providers of trauma services on surgical prioritization. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):33–41

Aims. Myxofibrosarcomas (MFSs) are malignant soft-tissue sarcomas characteristically presenting as painless slowly growing masses in the extremities. Locally infiltrative growth means that the risk of local recurrence is high. We reviewed our experience to make recommendations about resection strategies and the role of the multidisciplinary team in the management of these tumours. Patients and Methods. Patients with a primary or recurrent MFS who were treated surgically in our unit between 1997 and 2012 were included in the study. Clinical records and imaging were reviewed. A total of 50 patients with a median age of 68.4 years (interquartile range 61.6 to 81.8) were included. There were 35 men; 49 underwent surgery in our unit. Results. The lower limb was the most common site (32/50, 64%). The mean size of the tumours was 8.95 cm (1.5 to 27.0); 26 (52%) were French Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer grade III. A total of 21 (43%) had positive margins after the initial excision; 11 underwent further excision. Histology showed microscopic spread of up to 29 mm beyond macroscopic tumour. Local recurrence occurred in seven patients (14%) at a mean of 21 months (3 to 33) and 15 (30%) developed metastases at a mean of 17 months (3 to 30) post-operatively. Conclusion. High rates of positive margins and the need for further excision makes this tumour particularly suited to management by multidisciplinary surgical teams. Microscopic tumour can be present up to 29 mm from the macroscopic tumour in fascially-based tumours. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1682–8

Aims. COVID-19 has changed the practice of orthopaedics across the globe. The medical workforce has dealt with this outbreak with varying strategies and adaptations, which are relevant to its field and to the region. As one of the ‘hotspots’ in the UK , the surgical branch of trauma and orthopaedics need strategies to adapt to the ever-changing landscape of COVID-19. Methods. Adapting to the crisis locally involved five operational elements: 1) triaging and workflow of orthopaedic patients; 2) operation theatre feasibility and functioning; 3) conservation of human resources and management of workforce in the department; 4) speciality training and progression; and 5) developing an exit strategy to resume elective work. Two hospitals under our trust were redesignated based on the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Registrar/consultant led telehealth reviews were carried out for early postoperative patients. Workflows for the management of outpatient care and inpatient care were created. We looked into the development of a dedicated operating space to perform the emergency orthopaedic surgeries without symptoms of COVID-19. Between March 23 and April 23, 2020, we have surgically treated 133 patients across both our hospitals in our trust. This mainly included hip fractures and fractures/infection affecting the hand. Conclusion. The COVID-19 pandemic is not the first disease outbreak affecting the UK, nor will it be the last. The current crisis has necessitated rapid development of new hospital guidelines and early adaptive strategies in our services. Protocols and directives need to be formalized keeping in mind that COVID-19 will have a long and protracted course until a definitive cure is discovered

The COVID-19 pandemic creates unique challenges in the practice of spinal surgery. We aim to show how the use of a high-definition 3D digital exoscope can help streamline workflows, and protect both patients and healthcare staff