Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1016 - 1020
9 Jul 2024
Trompeter AJ Costa ML

Aims. Weightbearing instructions after musculoskeletal injury or orthopaedic surgery are a key aspect of the rehabilitation pathway and prescription. The terminology used to describe the weightbearing status of the patient is variable; many different terms are used, and there is recognition and evidence that the lack of standardized terminology contributes to confusion in practice. Methods. A consensus exercise was conducted involving all the major stakeholders in the patient journey for those with musculoskeletal injury. The consensus exercise primary aim was to seek agreement on a standardized set of terminology for weightbearing instructions. Results. A pre-meeting questionnaire was conducted. The one-day consensus meeting, including patient representatives, identified three agreed terms only to be used in defining the weightbearing status of the patient: 1) non-weightbearing; 2) limited weightbearing; and 3) unrestricted weightbearing. Conclusion. This study represents the first and only exercise in standardizing rehabilitation terminology in orthopaedics, as agreed by all major stakeholders in the patient pathway and the patients themselves. The standardization of language allows for higher-quality and more accurate research to be conducted, and is one small part of the bigger picture in increasing the mobility of patients after orthopaedic injury or surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):1016–1020


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 5 | Pages 359 - 366
1 May 2022
Sadekar V Watts AT Moulder E Souroullas P Hadland Y Barron E Muir R Sharma HK

Aims

The timing of when to remove a circular frame is crucial; early removal results in refracture or deformity, while late removal increases the patient morbidity and delay in return to work. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a staged reloading protocol. We report the incidence of mechanical failure following both single-stage and two stage reloading protocols and analyze the associated risk factors.

Methods

We identified consecutive patients from our departmental database. Both trauma and elective cases were included, of all ages, frame types, and pathologies who underwent circular frame treatment. Our protocol is either a single-stage or two-stage process implemented by defunctioning the frame, in order to progressively increase the weightbearing load through the bone, and promote full loading prior to frame removal. Before progression, through the process we monitor patients for any increase in pain and assess radiographs for deformity or refracture.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1168 - 1176
1 Sep 2019
Calder PR McKay JE Timms AJ Roskrow T Fugazzotto S Edel P Goodier WD

Aims

The Precice intramedullary limb-lengthening system has demonstrated significant benefits over external fixation lengthening methods, leading to a paradigm shift in limb lengthening. This study compares outcomes following antegrade and retrograde femoral lengthening in both adolescent and adult patients.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was undertaken of a consecutive series of 107 femoral lengthening operations in 92 patients. In total, 73 antegrade nails and 34 retrograde nails were inserted. Outcome was assessed by the regenerate healing index (HI), hip and knee range of movement (ROM), and the presence of any complications.