The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society was started in an endeavour to answer the difficult problem of obtaining enough patients to perform top-quality research into fractures. By maintaining a high standard, including randomised study design, inclusivity, open discussion among surgeons and excellent long-term follow-up, this group has become a leader in the orthopaedic research community. This annotation describes the short history, important components and spirit necessary to build a research community or team which will function well despite the difficult research environment facing individual surgeons.

We have developed a list of 281 competencies deemed to be of importance in the training of orthopaedic surgeons. A stratified, randomised selection of non-university orthopaedic surgeons rated each individual item on a scale 1 to 4 of increasing importance. Summary statistics across all respondents were given. The mean scores and sds were computed. Secondary analyses were computed in general orthopaedics, paediatrics, trauma and adult reconstruction. Of the 156 orthopaedic surgeons approached 131 (84%) responded to the questionnaire. They rated 240 of the 281 items greater than 3.0 suggesting that competence in these was necessary by completion of training.

Complex procedures were rated to be less important. The structure, delivery and implementation of the curriculum needs further study. Learning activities are ‘driven’ by the evaluation of competencies and thus competency-based learning may soon be in the forefront of training programmes.

The incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and the need for thromboprophylaxis following isolated trauma below the knee is uncertain. We have investigated this with a prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial using low molecular weight heparin with saline injection as placebo in patients aged between 18 and 75 years who had sustained an isolated fracture below the knee which required operative fixation. All patients had surgery within 48 hours of injury and were randomised to receive either the placebo or low molecular weight heparin for 14 days, after which they underwent bilateral lower limb venography, interpreted by three independent radiologists. Further follow-up was undertaken at two, six, eight and 12 weeks.

A total of 238 patients fulfilled all the inclusion criteria, with 127 in the low molecular weight heparin group and 111 in the placebo group, all of whom underwent bilateral venography. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis between those patients treated with low molecular weight heparin or the placebo (p = 0.22). The number of deep-vein thromboses in the two groups was 11 (8.7%) and 14 (12.6%), respectively. Age and the type of fracture were significantly associated with the rate of deep-vein thrombosis (p = 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively) but gender, comorbidities and the body mass index were not.

The overall incidence of deep-vein thrombosis in this series was 11%. There was no clinical or statistical significant reduction in the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis with the use of thromboprophylaxis. However, we accept that owing to a cessation of funding, recruitment to this trial had to be ended prior to establishing the necessary sample size. Our results cannot, therefore, categorically exclude the possibility that low molecular weight heparin treatment could be beneficial. We recommend a further multicentre trial be undertaken to resolve this matter.