Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 24
Results per page:

Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 6 | Pages 6 - 12
1 Dec 2023
Vallier HA Breslin MA Taylor LA Hendrickson SB Ollivere B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 4 | Pages 5 - 7
1 Aug 2022
Hennessy O


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 3 | Pages 5 - 7
1 Jun 2020
Lebel DE Rocos B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 2 | Pages 3 - 6
1 Apr 2020
Myint Y Ollivere B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 8, Issue 2 | Pages 2 - 8
1 Apr 2019
Shivji F Bryson D Nicolaou N Ali F


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 5 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Oct 2018
Palan J Bloch BV Shannak O James P


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 2 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Apr 2018
Das A Giddie J Ollivere B


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 4 | Pages 3 - 8
1 Aug 2018
White TO Carter TH


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 3 | Pages 2 - 6
1 Jun 2018
Mayne AIW Campbell DM


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 6, Issue 6 | Pages 2 - 10
1 Dec 2017
Luokkala T Watts AC


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 6, Issue 4 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Aug 2017
Titchener AG Tambe AA Clark DI


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 6 | Pages 2 - 5
1 Dec 2015
Dodd L Sharpe I Mandalia VI Toms AD Phillips JRA

The global economy has been facing a financial crisis. Healthcare costs are spiraling, and there is a projected £30 billion health funding gap by 2020 in the UK.1 This has prompted a drive for efficiency in healthcare provision in the UK, and in 2012, the Health and Social Care Act was introduced, heralding a fundamental change to the structure of the National Health Service, especially in the way that healthcare is funded in England.2

What is happening in the UK is a reflection of a global problem. Rationing of healthcare is a topic of much discussion; as unless spending is capped, providing healthcare will become unsustainable. Who decides how money is spent, and which services should be rationed?

In this article we aim to discuss the impact that rationing may have on orthopaedic surgery, and we will discuss our own experiences of attempts to ration local services.3 We also seek to inform and educate the general orthopaedic community on this topic.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 5, Issue 1 | Pages 2 - 8
1 Feb 2016
Bryson D Shivji F Price K Lawniczak D Chell J Hunter J


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 4 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Aug 2015
Nicol S Jackson M Monsell F

This review explores recent advances in fixator design and used in contemporary orthopaedic practice including the management of bone loss, complex deformity and severe isolated limb injury.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 5 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Oct 2015
Clark GW Wood DJ

The use of robotics in arthroplasty surgery is expanding rapidly as improvements in the technology evolve. This article examines current evidence to justify the usage of robotics, as well as the future potential in this emerging field.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 1 | Pages 6 - 11
1 Feb 2015
Manktelow A Bloch B

This review examines the future of total hip arthroplasty, aiming to avoid past mistakes


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 2 | Pages 2 - 6
1 Apr 2015
Lever CJ Robinson AHN

Ankle replacements have improved significantly since the first reported attempt at resurfacing of the talar dome in 1962. We are now at a stage where ankle replacement offers a viable option in the treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis. As the procedure becomes more successful, it is important to reflect and review the current surgical outcomes. This allows us to guide our patients in the treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis. What is the better surgical treatment – arthrodesis or replacement?


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 3, Issue 5 | Pages 2 - 7
1 Oct 2014
Unsworth-Smith T Wood D

Obesity is a global epidemic of 2.1 billion people and a well known cause of osteoarthritis. Joint replacement in the obese attracts more complications, poorer outcomes and higher revision rates. It is a reversible condition and the fundamental principles of dealing with reversible medical conditions prior to elective total joint replacement should apply to obesity. The dilemma for orthopaedic surgeons is when to offer surgery in the face of a reversible condition, which if treated may obviate joint replacement and reduce the risk and severity of obesity related disease in both the medical arena and the field of orthopaedics.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 3, Issue 1 | Pages 7 - 10
1 Feb 2014
Stahel PF

The “Universal Protocol” (UP) was launched as a regulatory compliance standard by the Joint Commission on 1st July 1 2004, with the primary intent of reducing the occurrence of wrong-site and wrong-patient surgery. As we’re heading into the tenth year of the UP implementation in the United States, it is time for critical assessment of the protocol’s impact on patient safety related to the incidence of preventable never-events. This article opens the debate on the potential shortcomings and pitfalls of the UP, and provides recommendations on how to circumvent specific inherent vulnerabilities of this widely established patient safety protocol.