Deprivation underpins many societal and health inequalities. COVID-19 has exacerbated these disparities, with access to planned care falling greatest in the most deprived areas of the UK during 2020. This study aimed to identify the impact of deprivation on patients on growing waiting lists for planned care. Questionnaires were sent to orthopaedic waiting list patients at the start of the UK’s first COVID-19 lockdown to capture key quantitative and qualitative aspects of patients’ health. A total of 888 respondents were divided into quintiles, with sampling stratified based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD); level 1 represented the ‘most deprived’ cohort and level 5 the ‘least deprived’.Aims
Methods
COVID-19 has compounded a growing waiting list problem, with over 4.5 million patients now waiting for planned elective care in the UK. Views of patients on waiting lists are rarely considered in prioritization. Our primary aim was to understand how to support patients on waiting lists by hearing their experiences, concerns, and expectations. The secondary aim was to capture objective change in disability and coping mechanisms. A minimum representative sample of 824 patients was required for quantitative analysis to provide a 3% margin of error. Sampling was stratified by body region (upper/lower limb, spine) and duration on the waiting list. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of elective orthopaedic waiting list patients with their planned intervention paused due to COVID-19. Analyzed parameters included baseline health, change in physical/mental health status, challenges and coping strategies, preferences/concerns regarding treatment, and objective quality of life (EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item scale (GAD-2)). Qualitative analysis was performed via the Normalization Process Theory.Aims
Methods
The use of journal clubs and, more recently,
case-based discussions in order to stimulate debate among orthopaedic
surgeons lies at the heart of orthopaedic training and education. A
virtual learning environment can be used as a platform to host virtual
journal clubs and case-based discussions. This has many advantages
in the current climate of constrained time and diminishing trainee
and consultant participation in such activities. The virtual environment
model opens up participation and improves access to journal clubs
and case-based discussions, provides reusable educational content,
establishes an electronic record of participation for individuals,
makes use of multimedia material (including clinical imaging and
photographs) for discussion, and finally, allows participants to
link case-based discussions with relevant papers in the journal
club. The Leicester experience highlights the many advantages and some
of the potential difficulties in setting up such a virtual system
and provides useful guidance for those considering such a system
in their own training programme. As a result of the virtual learning
environment, trainee participation has increased and there is a
trend for increased consultant input in the virtual journal club
and case-based discussions. It is likely that the use of virtual environments will expand
to encompass newer technological approaches to personal learning
and professional development.
