Aims. Orthopaedic surgeries are complex, frequently performed procedures associated with significant haemorrhage and perioperative blood transfusion. Given refinements in surgical techniques and changes to transfusion practices, we aim to describe contemporary transfusion practices in orthopaedic surgery in order to inform perioperative planning and blood banking requirements. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent orthopaedic surgery at four Canadian hospitals between 2014 and 2016. We studied all patients admitted to hospital for nonarthroscopic joint surgeries, amputations, and fracture surgeries. For each surgery and surgical subgroup, we characterized the proportion of patients who received red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, the mean/median number of RBC units transfused, and exposure to platelets and plasma. Results. Of the 14,584 included patients, the most commonly performed surgeries were knee arthroplasty (24.8%), hip arthroplasty (24.6%), and
Aims. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, incidence of
Aims.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a rapidly implemented restructuring of UK healthcare services. The The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, became a central hub for the provision of trauma services for North Central/East London (NCEL) while providing a musculoskeletal tumour service for the south of England, the Midlands, and Wales and an urgent spinal service for London. This study reviews our paediatric practice over this period in order to share our experience and lessons learned. Our hospital admission pathways are described and the safety of surgical and interventional radiological procedures performed under general anaesthesia (GA) with regards to COVID-19 in a paediatric population are evaluated. All paediatric patients (≤ 16 years) treated in our institution during the six-week peak period of the pandemic were included. Prospective data for all paediatric trauma and urgent elective admissions and retrospective data for all sarcoma admissions were collected. Telephone interviews were conducted with all patients and families to assess COVID-19 related morbidity at 14 days post-discharge.Introduction
Methods
Aims. The aim of this study is to determine the effects of the UK lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic on the orthopaedic admissions, operations, training opportunities, and theatre efficiency in a large district general hospital. Methods. The number of patients referred to the orthopaedic team between 1 April 2020 and 30 April 2020 were collected. Other data collected included patient demographics, number of admissions, number and type of operations performed, and seniority of primary surgeon. Theatre time was collected consisting of anaesthetic time, surgical time, time to leave theatre, and turnaround time. Data were compared to the same period in 2019. Results. There was a significant increase in median age of admitted patients during lockdown (70.5 (interquartile range (IQR) 46.25 to 84) vs 57 (IQR 27 to 79.75); p = 0.017) with a 26% decrease in referrals from 303 to 224 patients and 37% decrease in admissions from 177 to 112 patients, with a significantly higher proportion of
Now that we are in the deceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus has shifted to how to safely reinstate elective operating. Regional and speciality specific data is important to guide this decision-making process. This study aimed to review 30-day mortality for all patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery during the peak of the pandemic within our region. This multicentre study reviewed data on all patients undergoing trauma and orthopaedic surgery in a region from 18 March 2020 to 27 April 2020. Information was collated from regional databases. Patients were COVID-19-positive if they had positive laboratory testing and/or imaging consistent with the infection. 30-day mortality was assessed for all patients. Secondly, 30-day mortality in fracture neck of femur patients was compared to the same time period in 2019.Aims
Methods
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
Drug therapy forms an integral part of the management
of many orthopaedic conditions. However, many medicines can produce
serious adverse reactions if prescribed inappropriately, either
alone or in combination with other drugs. Often these hazards are
not appreciated. In response to this, the European Union recently
issued legislation regarding safety measures which member states
must adopt to minimise the risk of errors of medication. In March 2014 the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory
Agency and NHS England released a Patient Safety Alert initiative
focussed on errors of medication. There have been similar initiatives
in the United States under the auspices of The National Coordinating
Council for Medication Error and The Joint Commission on the Accreditation
of Healthcare Organizations. These initiatives have highlighted
the importance of informing and educating clinicians. Here, we discuss common drug interactions and contra-indications
in orthopaedic practice. This is germane to safe and effective clinical
care. Cite this article:
Osteoporosis is common and the health and financial
cost of fragility fractures is considerable. The burden of cardiovascular
disease has been reduced dramatically by identifying and targeting
those most at risk. A similar approach is potentially possible in
the context of fragility fractures. The World Health Organization
created and endorsed the use of FRAX, a fracture risk assessment
tool, which uses selected risk factors to calculate a quantitative,
patient-specific, ten-year risk of sustaining a fragility fracture.
Treatment can thus be based on this as well as on measured bone
mineral density. It may also be used to determine at-risk individuals,
who should undergo bone densitometry. FRAX has been incorporated
into the national osteoporosis guidelines of countries in the Americas,
Europe, the Far East and Australasia. The United Kingdom National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence also advocates its
use in their guidance on the assessment of the risk of fragility
fracture, and it may become an important tool to combat the health
challenges posed by fragility fractures.
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.
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis
to compare the efficacy of intermittent mechanical compression combined
with pharmacological thromboprophylaxis, against either mechanical
compression or pharmacological prophylaxis in preventing deep-vein
thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism in patients undergoing hip
or knee replacement. A total of six randomised controlled trials,
evaluating a total of 1399 patients, were identified. In knee arthroplasty,
the rate of DVT was reduced from 18.7% with anticoagulation alone
to 3.7% with combined modalities (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, p = 0.03;
number needed to treat: seven). There was moderate, albeit non-significant,
heterogeneity (I2 = 42%). In hip replacement, there was
a non-significant reduction in DVT from 8.7% with mechanical compression
alone to 7.2% with additional pharmacological prophylaxis (RR 0.84)
and a significant reduction in DVT from 9.7% with anticoagulation
alone to 0.9% with additional mechanical compression (RR 0.17, p
<
0.001; number needed to treat: 12), with no heterogeneity (I2 =
0%). The included studies had insufficient power to demonstrate
an effect on pulmonary embolism. We conclude that the addition of intermittent mechanical leg
compression augments the efficacy of anticoagulation in preventing
DVT in patients undergoing both knee and hip replacement. Further
research on the role of combined modalities in thromboprophylaxis
in joint replacement and in other high-risk situations, such as fracture
of the hip, is warranted.
Over a 13-year period we studied all patients who underwent major hip and knee surgery and were diagnosed with objectively confirmed symptomatic venous thromboembolism, either deep venous thrombosis or non-fatal pulmonary embolism, within six months after surgery. Low-molecular-weight heparin had been given while the patients were in hospital. There were 5607 patients. The cumulative incidence of symptomatic venous thromboembolism was 2.7% (150 of 5607), of which 1.1% had developed pulmonary embolism, 1.5% had deep venous thrombosis and 0.6% had both. Patients presented with deep venous thrombosis at a median of 24 days and pulmonary embolism at 17 days after surgery for
This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in high-risk orthopaedic patients. A total of 58 patients had a retrievable inferior vena cava filter placed as an adjunct to chemical and mechanical prophylaxis, most commonly for a history of previous deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, polytrauma, or expected prolonged immobilisation. In total 56 patients (96.6%) had an uncomplicated post-operative course. Two patients (3.4%) died in the peri-operative period for unrelated reasons. Of the 56 surviving patients, 50 (89%) were available for follow-up. A total of 32 filters (64%) were removed without complication at a mean of 37.8 days (4 to 238) after placement. There were four filters (8%) which were retained because of thrombosis at the filter site, and four (8%) were retained because of incorporation of the filter into the wall of the inferior vena cava. In ten cases (20%) the retrievable filter was left in place to continue as primary prophylaxis. No patient had post-removal thromboembolic complications. A retrievable inferior vena cava filter, as an adjunct to chemical and mechanical prophylaxis, was a safe and effective means of reducing the acute risk of pulmonary embolism in this high-risk group of patients. Although most filters were removed without complications, thereby avoiding the long-term complications that have plagued permanent indwelling filters, a relatively high percentage of filters had to be left