Collaborative overview of coronaVIrus impact on ORTHopaedic training in the UK (COVI - ORTH UK)

Introduction COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on the 11th of March 2020 with the NHS deferring all non-urgent activity from the 15th of April 2020. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of COVID-19 on Trauma and Orthopaedic trainees nationally. Methods Trauma and Orthopaedic (T&O) specialty trainees nationally were asked to complete an electronic survey specifically on the impact of COVID-19 on their training. This UK based survey was conducted between May 2020 and July 2020. Results A total of 185 out of 975 (19%) T&O specialty trainees completed the survey. Redeployment was experienced by 25% of trainees. 84% of respondents had experienced a fall in total operating numbers in comparison with the same time period in 2019. 89% experienced a fall in elective operating and 63% experienced a fall in trauma operating. The pandemic has also had an effect on the delivery of teaching, with face to face teaching being replaced by webinar-based teaching. 63% of training programmes delivered regular weekly teaching, whilst 19% provided infrequent sessions and 11% provided no teaching. Conclusion This study has objectively demonstrated the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on all aspects of T&O training

Collaborative overview of coronaVIrus impact on ORTHopaedic training in the UK (COVI - ORTH UK)

Introduction COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on the 11th of March 2020 with the NHS deferring all non-urgent activity from the 15th of April 2020. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of COVID-19 on Trauma and Orthopaedic trainees nationally. Methods Trauma and Orthopaedic (T&O) specialty trainees nationally were asked to complete an electronic survey specifically on the impact of COVID-19 on their training. This UK based survey was conducted between May 2020 and July 2020. Results A total of 185 out of 975 (19%) T&O specialty trainees completed the survey. Redeployment was experienced by 25% of trainees. 84% of respondents had experienced a fall in total operating numbers in comparison with the same time period in 2019. 89% experienced a fall in elective operating and 63% experienced a fall in trauma operating. The pandemic has also had an effect on the delivery of teaching, with face to face teaching being replaced by webinar-based teaching. 63% of training programmes delivered regular weekly teaching, whilst 19% provided infrequent sessions and 11% provided no teaching. Conclusion This study has objectively demonstrated the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on all aspects of T&O training

The characteristics and predictors of mortality in periprosthetic fractures around the knee

AIMS: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around the knee are challenging injuries. This study aims to describe the characteristics of knee PPFs and the impact of patient demographics, fracture types, and management modalities on in-hospital mortality. METHODS: Using a multicentre study design, independent of registry data, we included adult patients sustaining a PPF around a knee arthroplasty between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Univariate, then multivariable, logistic regression analyses were performed to study the impact of patient, fracture, and treatment on mortality. RESULTS: Out of a total of 1,667 patients in the PPF study database, 420 patients were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.4%. Multivariable analyses suggested that American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, history of peripheral vascular disease (PVD), history of rheumatic disease, fracture around a loose implant, and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) during hospital stay were each independently associated with mortality. Each point increase in ASA grade independently correlated with a four-fold greater mortality risk (odds ratio (OR) 4.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 14.06); p = 0.026). Patients with PVD have a nine-fold increase in mortality risk (OR 9.1 (95% CI 1.25 to 66.47); p = 0.030) and patients with rheumatic disease have a 6.8-fold increase in mortality risk (OR 6.8 (95% CI 1.32 to 34.68); p = 0.022). Patients with a fracture around a loose implant (Unified Classification System (UCS) B2) have a 20-fold increase in mortality, compared to UCS A1 (OR 20.9 (95% CI 1.61 to 271.38); p = 0.020). Mode of management was not a significant predictor of mortality. Patients managed with revision arthroplasty had a significantly longer length of stay (median 16 days; p = 0.029) and higher rates of return to theatre, compared to patients treated nonoperatively or with fixation. CONCLUSION: The mortality rate in PPFs around the knee is similar to that for native distal femur and neck of femur fragility fractures. Patients with certain modifiable risk factors should be optimized. A national PPF database and standardized management guidelines are currently required to understand these complex injuries and to improve patient outcomes.0Not hel

Predictors of mortality in periprosthetic fractures of the hip: Results from the national PPF study

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around the hip joint are increasing in prevalence. In this collaborative study, we aimed to investigate the impact of patient demographics, fracture characteristics, and modes of management on in-hospital mortality of PPFs involving the hip. METHODS: Using a multi-centre cohort study design, we retrospectively identified adults presenting with a PPF around the hip over a 10-year period. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to study the independent correlation between patient, fracture, and treatment factors on mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,109 patients were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 5.3%. Multivariable analyses suggested that age, male sex, abbreviated mental test score (AMTS), pneumonia, renal failure, history of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and deep surgical site infection were each independently associated with mortality. Each yearly increase in age independently correlates with a 7% increase in mortality (OR 1.07, p=0.019). The odds of mortality was 2.99 times higher for patients diagnosed with pneumonia during their hospital stay [OR 2.99 (95% CI 1.07-8.37) p=0.037], and 7.25 times higher for patients that developed renal failure during their stay [OR 7.25 (95% CI 1.85-28.47) p=0.005]. Patients with history of PVD have a six-fold greater mortality risk (OR 6.06, p=0.003). Mode of treatment was not a significant predictor of mortality. CONCLUSION: The in-hospital mortality rate of PPFs around the hip exceeds 5%. The fracture subtype and mode of management are not independent predictors of mortality, while patient factors such as age, AMTS, history of PVD, pneumonia, and renal failure can independently predict mortality. Peri-operative optimisation of modifiable risk factors such as lung and kidney function in patients with PPFs around the hip during their hospital stay is of utmost importance.Published version, accepted version (12 month embargo), submitted versionThe article is available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text

Comparison of common perioperative blood loss estimation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Estimating intraoperative blood loss is one of the daily challenges for clinicians. Despite the knowledge of the inaccuracy of visual estimation by anaesthetists and surgeons, this is still the mainstay to estimate surgical blood loss. This review aims at highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of currently used measurement methods. A systematic review of studies on estimation of blood loss was carried out. Studies were included investigating the accuracy of techniques for quantifying blood loss in vivo and in vitro. We excluded nonhuman trials and studies using only monitoring parameters to estimate blood loss. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate systematic measurement errors of the different methods. Only studies that were compared with a validated reference e.g. Haemoglobin extraction assay were included. 90 studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review and were analyzed. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis, as only these were conducted with a validated reference. The mixed effect meta-analysis showed the highest correlation to the reference for colorimetric methods (0.93 95% CI 0.91-0.96), followed by gravimetric (0.77 95% CI 0.61-0.93) and finally visual methods (0.61 95% CI 0.40-0.82). The bias for estimated blood loss (ml) was lowest for colorimetric methods (57.59 95% CI 23.88-91.3) compared to the reference, followed by gravimetric (326.36 95% CI 201.65-450.86) and visual methods (456.51 95% CI 395.19-517.83). Of the many studies included, only a few were compared with a validated reference. The majority of the studies chose known imprecise procedures as the method of comparison. Colorimetric methods offer the highest degree of accuracy in blood loss estimation. Systems that use colorimetric techniques have a significant advantage in the real-time assessment of blood loss