Aims. The aim of this study was to quantify the risk of developing cancer from the exposure to radiation associated with surgery to correct limb deformities in children. Patients and Methods. A total of 35 children were studied. There were 19 girls and 16 boys. Their mean age was 11.9 years (2 to 18) at the time of surgery. Details of the radiological examinations were recorded during gradual correction using a Taylor Spatial Frame. The dose area product for each radiograph was obtained from the Computerised Radiology Information System database. The effective dose in millisieverts (mSv) was calculated using conversion coefficients for the anatomical area. The lifetime risk of developing cancer was calculated using government-approved Health Protection Agency reports, accounting for the age and gender of the child. Results. Correction was undertaken in five femurs, 18 tibiae, and 12 feet. The median duration of treatment was 45 months (11 to 118). The mean effective dose was 0.31 mSv (0.05 to 0.64) for the femur, 0.29 mSv (0.01 to 0.97) for the tibia, and 0.027 mSv (0.001 to 0.161) for the foot. The cumulative exposure gave ‘negligible’ risk in 26 children and ‘minimal’ risk in nine children, according to
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period. Cite this article:
The importance of accurate identification and reporting of surgical
site infection (SSI) is well recognised but poorly defined. Public
Health England (PHE) mandated collection of orthopaedic SSI data
in 2004. Data submission is required in one of four categories (hip
prosthesis, knee prosthesis, repair of neck of femur, reduction
of long bone fracture) for one quarter per year. Trusts are encouraged
to carry out post-discharge surveillance but this is not mandatory.
Recent papers in the orthopaedic literature have highlighted the
importance of SSI surveillance and the heterogeneity of surveillance
methods. However, details of current orthopaedic SSI surveillance
practice has not been described or quantified. All 147 NHS trusts in England were audited using a structured
questionnaire. Data was collected in the following categories: data
collection; data submission to PHE; definitions used; resource constraints;
post-discharge surveillance and SSI rates in the four PHE categories.
The response rate was 87.7%.Aims
Patients and Methods
The World Health Organization (WHO) launched
the first Global Patient Safety Challenge in 2005 and introduced
the ‘5 moments of hand hygiene’ in 2009 in an attempt to reduce
the burden of health care associated infections. Many NHS trusts
in England adopted this model of hand hygiene, which prompts health
care workers to clean their hands at five distinct stages of caring
for the patient. Our review analyses the scientific foundation for
the five moments of hand hygiene and explores the evidence, as referenced
by WHO, to support these recommendations. We found no strong scientific
support for this regime of hand hygiene as a means of reducing health
care associated infections. Consensus-based guidelines based on
weak scientific foundations should be assessed carefully to prevent
shifting the clinical focus from more important issues and to direct
limited resources more effectively. We recommend caution in the universal adoption of the WHO ‘5
moments of hand hygiene’ by orthopaedic surgeons and other health
care workers and emphasise the need for evidence-based principles
when adopting hospital guidelines aimed at promoting excellence
in clinical practice.
