Theatres without borders: a systematic review of the use of intraoperative telemedicine in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Objective: This systematic review aims to provide a summary of the use of real-time telementoring, telesurgical consultation and telesurgery in surgical procedures in patients in low/middle-income countries (LMICs). Design: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and the Cochrane Collaboration published guidelines. Data sources: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for original articles and case reports that discussed telementoring, telesurgery or telesurgical consultation in countries defined as low-income or middle-income (as per the World Banks’s 2021–2022 classifications) from inception to August 2021. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: All original articles and case reports were included if they reported the use of telemedicine, telesurgery or telesurgical consultation in procedures conducted on patients in LMICs. Results: There were 12 studies which discussed the use of telementoring in 55 patients in LMICs and included a variety of surgical specialities. There was one study that discussed the use of telesurgical consultation in 15 patients in LMICs and one study that discussed the use of telesurgery in one patient. Conclusion: The presence of intraoperative telemedicine in LMICs represents a principal move towards improving access to specialist surgical care for patients in resource-poor settings. Not only do several studies demonstrate that it facilitates training and educational opportunities, but it remains a relatively frugal and efficient method of doing so, through empowering local surgeons in LMICs towards offering optimal care while remaining in their respective communities

Increasing incidence of spondylodiscitis in England: an analysis of the national health service (NHS) hospital episode statistics from 2012 to 2021

Background Spondylodiscitis is a potentially life-threatening infection of the intervertebral disk and adjacent vertebral bodies, with a mortality rate of 2–20%. Given the aging population, the increase in immunosuppression, and intravenous drug use in England, the incidence of spondylodiscitis is postulated to be increasing; however, the exact epidemiological trend in England remains unknown. Objective The Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database contains details of all secondary care admissions across NHS hospitals in England. This study aimed to use HES data to characterise the annual activity and longitudinal change of spondylodiscitis in England. Methods The HES database was interrogated for all cases of spondylodiscitis between 2012 and 2019. Data for the length of stay, waiting time, age-stratified admissions, and ‘Finished Consultant Episodes’ (FCEs), which correspond to a patient's hospital care under a lead clinician, were analysed. Results In total, 43135 FCEs for spondylodiscitis were identified between 2012 and 2022, of which 97.1% were adults. Overall admissions for spondylodiscitis have risen from 3 per 100,000 population in 2012/13 to 4.4 per 100,000 population in 2020/21. Similarly, FCEs have increased from 5.8 to 10.3 per 100,000 population, in 2012–2013 and 2020/21 respectively. The highest increase in admissions from 2012 to 2021 was recorded for those aged 70–74 (117% increase) and aged 75-59 (133% increase), among those of working age for those aged 60–64 years (91% increase). Conclusion Population-adjusted admissions for spondylodiscitis in England have risen by 44% between 2012 and 2021. Healthcare policymakers and providers must acknowledge the increasing burden of spondylodiscitis and make spondylodiscitis a research priority

Conservative versus early surgical treatment in the management of pyogenic spondylodiscitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [Abstract]

Oral e-Poster Presentations - Booth 2: Spine 1 (Trauma&Misc), September 25, 2023, 10:00 AM - 10:40 AM Background: Spondylodiscitis is a prevalent type of spinal infection, with pyogenic spondylodiscitis being the most common subtype. While antibiotic therapy is the standard treatment, some argue that early surgery can aid in infection clearance, improve survival rates, and prevent long-term complications such as deformities. However, others view early surgery as excessively risky. Due to the high mortality rate of up to 20%, it is crucial to determine the most effective treatment. Methods: The primary objective of this study was to compare the mortality rate, relapse rate, and length of hospital stay for conservative and early surgical treatments of pyogenic spondylodiscitis, including determinants of outcomes. The study was registered on PROSPERO with the registration number CRD42022312573. The databases MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and JSTOR were searched for original studies comparing conservative and early surgical treatments of pyogenic spondylodiscitis. The included studies were assessed using the ROBINS-1 tool, and eligible studies were evaluated using meta-analyses, influence, and regression analyses. Results: The systematic review included 31 studies. The meta-analysis, which had a pooled sample size of 10,954 patients from 21 studies, found that the pooled mortality rate among patients treated with early surgery was 8%, while the rate was 13% for patients treated conservatively. The mean proportion of relapse/failure was 15% for patients treated with early surgery and 21% for those treated conservatively. Furthermore, the analysis concluded that early surgical treatment is associated with a 40% and 39% risk reduction in relapse/failure and mortality rates, respectively, when compared to conservative management. Additionally, early surgical treatment resulted in a 7.75-day reduction in length of hospital stay per patient (p<0.01). The most highly significant predictors of treatment outcome were found to be intravenous drug use, diabetes, the presence of an epidural abscess, positive cultures, location of infection, and age (p<0.001). Conclusions: Overall, early surgical management was found to be consistently significantly more effective than conservative management in terms of relapse/failure and mortality rates when treating pyogenic spondylodiscitis, particularly for non-spinal epidural abscess spondylodiscitis

Survivorship and risk factors for revision of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: a long-term follow-up study

Aims: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) has seen decreased usage due to safety and longevity concerns. Joint registries have highlighted the risks in females, smaller hips, and hip dysplasia. This study aimed to identify if reported risk factors are linked to revision in a long-term follow-up of MoM-HR performed by a non-designer surgeon. Methods: A retrospective review of consecutive MoM hip arthroplasties (MoM-HRAs) using Birmingham Hip Resurfacing was conducted. Data on procedure side, indication, implant sizes and orientation, highest blood cobalt and chromium ion concentrations, and all-cause revision were collected from local and UK National Joint Registry records. Results: A total of 243 hips (205 patients (163 male, 80 female; mean age at surgery 55.3 years (range 25.7 to 75.3)) with MoM-HRA performed between April 2003 and October 2020 were included. Mean follow-up was 11.2 years (range 0.3 to 17.8). Osteoarthritis was the most common indication (93.8%), and 13 hips (5.3%; 7M:6F) showed dysplasia (lateral centre-edge angle < 25°). Acetabular cups were implanted at a median of 45.4° abduction (interquartile range 41.9° - 48.3°) and stems neutral or valgus to the native neck-shaft angle. In all, 11 hips (4.5%; one male, ten females) in ten patients underwent revision surgery at a mean of 7.4 years (range 2.8 to 14.2), giving a cumulative survival rate of 94.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91.6% to 98.0%) at ten years, and 93.4% (95% CI 89.3% to 97.6%) at 17 years. For aseptic revision, male survivorship was 100% at 17 years, and 89.6% (95% CI 83.1% to 96.7%) at ten and 17 years for females. Increased metal ion levels were implicated in 50% of female revisions, with the remaining being revised for unexplained pain or avascular necrosis. Conclusion: The Birmingham MoM-HR showed 100% survivorship in males, exceeding the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ‘5% at ten years’ threshold. Female sex and small component sizes are independent risk factors. Dysplasia alone is not a contraindication to resurfacing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(11):853–858

Methods of communication.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.</div

Facilitators of engagement.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.</div

Aims and effectiveness of included studies.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.</div

Barriers to engagement.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.</div

PRISMA flow diagram.

Communities of practice (CoPs) are defined as "groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis". They are an effective form of knowledge management that have been successfully used in the business sector and increasingly so in healthcare. In May 2023 the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for primary research studies on CoPs published between 1st January 1950 and 31st December 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed. The following search terms were used: community/communities of practice AND (healthcare OR medicine OR patient/s). The database search picked up 2009 studies for screening. Of these, 50 papers met the inclusion criteria. The most common aim of CoPs was to directly improve a clinical outcome, with 19 studies aiming to achieve this. In terms of outcomes, qualitative outcomes were the most common measure used in 21 studies. Only 11 of the studies with a quantitative element had the appropriate statistical methodology to report significance. Of the 9 studies that showed a statistically significant effect, 5 showed improvements in hospital-based provision of services such as discharge planning or rehabilitation services. 2 of the studies showed improvements in primary-care, such as management of hepatitis C, and 2 studies showed improvements in direct clinical outcomes, such as central line infections. CoPs in healthcare are aimed at improving clinical outcomes and have been shown to be effective. There is still progress to be made and a need for further studies with more rigorous methodologies, such as RCTs, to provide further support of the causality of CoPs on outcomes.</div