Aims. The underlying natural history of suspected scaphoid fractures (SSFs) is unclear and assumed poor. There is an urgent requirement to develop the literature around SSFs to quantify the actual prevalence of intervention following SSF. Defining the risk of intervention following SSF may influence the need for widespread surveillance and screening of SSF injuries, and could influence medicolegal actions around missed scaphoid fractures. Methods. Data on SSF were retrospectively gathered from virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) across a large Scottish Health Board over a four-year period, from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021. The Bluespier Electronic Patient Record System identified any surgical procedure being undertaken in relation to a scaphoid injury over the same time period. Isolating patients who underwent surgical intervention for SSF was performed by cross-referencing the unique patient Community Health Index number for patients who underwent these scaphoid procedures with those seen at VFCs for SSF over this four-year period. Results. In total, 1,739 patients were identified as having had a SSF. Five patients (0.28%) underwent early open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). One patient (0.06%) developed a nonunion and underwent ORIF with bone grafting. All six patients undergoing surgery were male (p = 0.005). The overall rate of intervention following a SSF was 0.35%. The early intervention rate in those undergoing primary MRI was one (0.36%), compared with three in those without (0.27%) (p > 0.576). Conclusion. Surgical intervention was rare following a SSF and was not required in females. A primary MRI policy did not appear to be associated with any change in primary or secondary intervention. These data are the first and largest in recent literature to quantify the prevalence of surgical intervention following a SSF, and may be used to guide surveillance and screening pathways as well as define medicolegal risk involved in missing a true fracture in SSFs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):312–316

Background. A local authority approached us, for a cost-beneficial solution to their increasing low back pain referrals. We proposed developing a student-led clinic – an intervention delivered by students but supervised by clinicians. We then conducted scoping reviews on student-led clinics in the management of health conditions and on the self-management of back pain. The findings suggested that student-led self-management interventions for low back health should be feasible. The next step was to co-construct the intervention with key stakeholders. Co-Construction. A hybrid of Action Research and Design Science methodology was used to co-construct the intervention with five key stakeholder groups (council staff, managers and human resources, employee healthcare, students, and lecturers). Three rounds of focus groups explored the ‘problem’, the possible solutions, the process, and the content. Themes were taken from each of these focus groups and the similarities and differences were analysed. This analysis and subsequent synthesis with the evidence base created potential intervention models, which were discussed and refined with the stakeholder groups. Intervention. The proposed intervention is focused on providing evidence informed biopsychosocial support for work-relevant back pain, based on identifying obstacles and solutions to improve coping with back health at work. An onboarding workshop challenges positively their thinking around back pain and work. This is followed by up to three 1:1 sessions that support the individual to identify work-relevant back health goals and agree a plan to achieve them using techniques to facilitate behaviour change. Conclusion. The intervention is evidence informed and aims to address the prioritised needs of the stakeholders. Conflicts of interest. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding. National Health Service Education

Abstract. Introduction. There is a need to develop approaches to reduce chronic pain after total knee replacement. There is an established link between disturbed sleep and pain. We tested the feasibility of a trial evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a pre-operative sleep assessment and complex intervention package for improving long-term pain after TKR. Methodology. REST was a feasibility multi-centre randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative study and health economics. Participants completed baseline measures and were randomised to usual care or the intervention, a tailored sleep assessment and behavioural intervention package delivered by an extended scope practitioner three months pre-operatively with a follow-up call up at four-weeks. Patient reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, one-week pre-surgery, and 3-months post-surgery. Results. 57 patients were randomised and 20 had surgery within the study timelines. All patients allocated the intervention attended an appointment and most engaged with treatment. The intervention group reported improvements in sleep (Sleep Conditions Indicator) and neuropathic pain (painDETECT) scores. Participants found the sleep treatments and study processes to be acceptable. The mean cost of the intervention was estimated at £134.45 per patient. Conclusion. The feasibility study has shown that patient recruitment is feasible, engagement with and adherence to the intervention is high, and the intervention is acceptable to patients and clinicians. Preliminary findings show that the intervention group had improved sleep quality and had reduced levels of pre-operative neuropathic pain. This study has demonstrated that a full RCT is feasible and identified areas for improvement to optimize the trial design

Aims. Biofilm-related infection is a major complication that occurs in orthopaedic surgery. Various treatments are available but efficacy to eradicate infections varies significantly. A systematic review was performed to evaluate therapeutic interventions combating biofilm-related infections on in vivo animal models. Methods. Literature research was performed on PubMed and Embase databases. Keywords used for search criteria were “bone AND biofilm”. Information on the species of the animal model, bacterial strain, evaluation of biofilm and bone infection, complications, key findings on observations, prevention, and treatment of biofilm were extracted. Results. A total of 43 studies were included. Animal models used included fracture-related infections (ten studies), periprosthetic joint infections (five studies), spinal infections (three studies), other implant-associated infections, and osteomyelitis. The most common bacteria were Staphylococcus species. Biofilm was most often observed with scanning electron microscopy. The natural history of biofilm revealed that the process of bacteria attachment, proliferation, maturation, and dispersal would take 14 days. For systemic mono-antibiotic therapy, only two of six studies using vancomycin reported significant biofilm reduction, and none reported eradication. Ten studies showed that combined systemic and topical antibiotics are needed to achieve higher biofilm reduction or eradication, and the effect is decreased with delayed treatment. Overall, 13 studies showed promising therapeutic potential with surface coating and antibiotic loading techniques. Conclusion. Combined topical and systemic application of antimicrobial agents effectively reduces biofilm at early stages. Future studies with sustained release of antimicrobial and biofilm-dispersing agents tailored to specific pathogens are warranted to achieve biofilm eradication. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):700–714

Background. Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Immersive virtual reality (IVR) can be delivered using head mounted display (HMD) to interact with 3D virtual environment (VE). IVR has shown promising results in management of chronic pain conditions, using different mechanisms (e.g., exposure to movement and distraction). However, it has not been widely tested for CLBP. Future development of IVR intervention needs inputs from gatekeepers to determine key considerations, facilitators and barriers. This qualitative study aimed to explore views and opinions of physiotherapists about IVR intervention for adults with CLBP. Methods. Four focus groups were conducted online, with 16 physiotherapists. A demonstration of existing IVR mechanisms was presented. The data were transcribed and analysed through descriptive thematic analysis. Results. IVR was thought to be a suitable adjunct for a subgroup of patients who are reluctant to engage with standard care. Motivation to perform challenging physical tasks was believed to be a potential benefit. Safety, possibility of addiction, and transferability of acquired skills from VE to ‘real world’ and hygiene were concerns and the intervention was preferred to be used under clinical supervision. VE personalisation to patient's goal and preference with delivery and progression being gradual depending upon patient's abilities was suggested. Technical knowledge was seen as a facilitator, while cost and technology acceptance were barriers for future implementation. Conclusion. Future studies would need to consider the reported views of physiotherapists to inform development and implementation of IVR intervention for CLBP. Conflicts of interest: No conflict of interest. Sources of funding: Funded by the government of Saudi Arabia

Background and study purpose. A recent systematic review with meta-analysis of eight randomised controlled trials concluded that Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) for low back pain might be effective in reducing disability, pain and fear-avoidance beliefs. However, the descriptions of a CFT intervention are not always clear. This study aimed to rate the replicability of the CFT interventions and control groups in the systematic review. Methods. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the study articles, protocols and appendices into Microsoft Excel using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. This checklist has 12 items to describe the ‘why’, ‘what’, ‘who’, ‘how’, ‘where’, ‘when and how much’, ‘tailoring’, ‘modifications’, and ‘how well’ for each intervention. We rated the replicability of the CFT interventions and control groups as ‘reported’, ‘partially reported’ and ‘not reported’ and resolved discrepancies by consensus. Results. No studies reported 100% of the TIDieR items; the mean ‘reported’ rating was 54% (range 33–67%) for the CFT interventions and 35% (range 8–67%) for controls. The six most replicable items were the same for both CFT and control groups. These were ‘brief name’ (CFT=100%; control=100%), ‘why’ (CFT=100%; control=50%), ‘how’ (CFT=100%; control=50%), ‘what procedures’ (CFT=88%; control=63%), ‘where’ (CFT=88%; control=75%) and ‘planned adherence’ (CFT=75%; control=38%). Items that were not sufficiently ‘reported’ for either CFT or control groups included ‘when and how much’, ‘tailoring’ and ‘adherence’. Conclusion. Incomplete descriptions of CFT interventions mean that clinicians and patients cannot implement those that have demonstrated effectiveness, and poor descriptions of control groups prevent researchers from replicating them in future studies. Conflict of interest. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding. No funding obtained

Background. Internet delivered interventions may provide a route to rapid support for behavioural self-management for low back pain (LBP) that could be widely applied within primary care. Although evidence is emerging that more complex technologies (mobile apps linked to digital wristbands) can have some impact on LBP-related disability, there is a need to determine the effectiveness of highly accessible, web-based support for self-management for LBP. Methods and results. We conducted a multi-centre pragmatic randomised controlled trial, testing ‘SupportBack’, an accessible internet intervention developed specifically for primary care. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the SupportBack interventions in reducing LBP-related physical disability in primary care patients. Participants were randomised to 1 of 3 arms: 1) Usual care + internet intervention + physiotherapy telephone support, 2) Usual care + internet intervention, 3) Usual care alone. Utilising a repeated measures design, the primary outcome for the trial was disability over 12 months using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: 826 were randomised, with follow-up rates: 6 weeks = 83%; 3 months = 72%; 6 months = 70%; 12 months = 79%. Analysis is ongoing, comparing each intervention arm versus usual care alone. The key results will be presented at the conference. Conclusion. We believe this to be the largest trial of it's kind internationally. The trial will extend knowledge regarding the effectiveness of highly accessible internet interventions to support self-management and activity in people with LBP consulting in primary care. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Source of funding: NIHR HTA Project number 16/111/78

Abstract. Source of Study: London, United Kingdom. This intervention study was conducted to assess two developing protocols for quadriceps and hamstring rehabilitation: Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) and Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Training (NMES). BFR involves the application of an external compression cuff to the proximal thigh. In NMES training a portable electrical stimulation unit is connected to the limb via 4 electrodes. In both training modalities, following device application, a standardised set of exercises were performed by all participants. BFR and NMES have been developed to assist with rehabilitation following lower limb trauma and surgery. They offer an alternative for individuals who are unable to tolerate the high mechanical stresses associated with traditional rehabilitation programmes. The use of BFR and NMES in this study was compared across a total of 20 participants. Following allocation into one of the training programmes, the individuals completed training programmes across a 4-week period. Post-intervention outcomes were assessed using Surface Electromyography (EMG) which recorded EMG amplitude values for the following muscles: Vastus Medialis, Vastus Lateralis, Rectus Femoris and Semitendinosus. Increased Semitendinosus muscle activation was observed post intervention in both BFR and NMES training groups. Statistically significant differences between the two groups was not identified. Larger scale randomised-controlled trials are recommended to further assess for possible treatment effects in these promising training modalities

Aims. Fractures of the humeral shaft represent 3% to 5% of all fractures. The most common treatment for isolated humeral diaphysis fractures in the UK is non-operative using functional bracing, which carries a low risk of complications, but is associated with a longer healing time and a greater risk of nonunion than surgery. There is an increasing trend to surgical treatment, which may lead to quicker functional recovery and lower rates of fracture nonunion than functional bracing. However, surgery carries inherent risk, including infection, bleeding, and nerve damage. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of functional bracing compared to surgical fixation for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Methods. The HUmeral SHaft (HUSH) fracture study is a multicentre, prospective randomized superiority trial of surgical versus non-surgical interventions for humeral shaft fractures in adult patients. Participants will be randomized to receive either functional bracing or surgery. With 334 participants, the trial will have 90% power to detect a clinically important difference for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score, assuming 20% loss to follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include function, pain, quality of life, complications, cost-effectiveness, time off work, and ability to drive. Discussion. The results of this trial will provide evidence regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness between surgical and non-surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Ethical approval has been obtained from East of England – Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee. Publication is anticipated to occur in 2024. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):343–349

Abstract. INTRODUCTION. Geniculate nerve blocks (GNB) and ablation (GNA) are increasing in popularity as strategies for the management of knee pain in patients unsuitable for surgical intervention. Typically these simple blocks have been performed by specialists in pain medicine. We present the results of a GNB clinic run by a surgical care practitioner (SCP). METHODOLOGY. An SCP clinic was created where ultrasound-guided GNBs comprising local anaesthetic and steroid were administered. Patients considered unsuitable for surgery were referred with knee pain by orthopaedic knee surgeons and specialist physiotherapists. A VAS pain score and an Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were completed prior to and immediately following blockade. Serial VAS diaries were completed. Further OKS were requested at 6 weeks and 6 months. Patients could request GNA at any point during follow-up and their follow-up ceased at this stage. RESULTS. 50 patients were identified between December 2020 and 2021. Patients are followed up until 6 months post-block or until referral for GNA. Pre-blockade mean OKS was 13.4, mean VAS 8.6, post procedure mean VAS 2.7. Six-week mean OKS was 20.9 in those not referred for ablation, mean improvement of 7.3. Of the cohort of 50, 25 have progressed to ablation. CONCLUSION. GNB is a simple procedure which can provide both lasting symptomatic relief and prognostic information in the treatment of patients with knee pain not amenable to surgical intervention, a growing subset of patients. This SCP-led clinic increases capacity for the provision of GNBs, helping to identify patients suitable for GNA

Aims. Aneurysmal bone cysts (ABCs) are locally aggressive lesions typically found in the long bones of children and adolescents. A variety of management strategies have been reported to be effective in the treatment of these lesions. The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of current strategies for the management of primary ABCs of the long bones. Methods. A systematic review of the published literature was performed to identify all articles relating to the management of primary ABCs. Studies required a minimum 12-month follow-up and case series reporting on under ten participants were not included. Results. A total of 28 articles meeting the eligibility criteria were included in this review, and all but one were retrospective in design. Due to heterogeneity in study design, treatment, and outcome reporting, data synthesis and group comparison was not possible. The most common treatment option reported on was surgical curettage with or without a form of adjuvant therapy, followed by injection-based therapies. Of the 594 patients treated with curettage across 17 studies, 86 (14.4%) failed to heal or experienced a recurrence. Similar outcomes were reported for 57 (14.70%) of the 387 patients treated with injection therapy across 12 studies. Only one study directly compared curettage with injection therapy (polidocanol), randomizing 94 patients into both treatment groups. This study was at risk of bias and provided low-quality evidence of a lack of difference between the two interventions, reporting success rates of 93.3% and 84.8% for injection and surgical treatment groups, respectively. Conclusion. While both surgery and sclerotherapy are widely implemented for treatment of ABCs, there is currently no good quality evidence to support the use of one option over the other. There is a need for prospective multicentre randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions for the treatment of ABCs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):125–133

Aims. This study aims to assess the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic, multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an informal caregiver training programme to support the recovery of people following hip fracture surgery. Methods. This will be a mixed-methods feasibility RCT, recruiting 60 patients following hip fracture surgery and their informal caregivers. Patients will be randomized to usual NHS care, versus usual NHS care plus a caregiver-patient dyad training programme (HIP HELPER). This programme will comprise of three, one-hour, one-to-one training sessions for the patient and caregiver, delivered by a nurse, physiotherapist, or occupational therapist. Training will be delivered in the hospital setting pre-patient discharge. It will include practical skills for rehabilitation such as: transfers and walking; recovery goal setting and expectations; pacing and stress management techniques; and introduction to the HIP HELPER Caregiver Workbook, which provides information on recovery, exercises, worksheets, and goal-setting plans to facilitate a ‘good’ recovery. After discharge, patients and caregivers will be supported in delivering rehabilitation through three telephone coaching sessions. Data, collected at baseline and four months post-randomization, will include: screening logs, intervention logs, fidelity checklists, quality assurance monitoring visit data, and clinical outcomes assessing quality of life, physical, emotional, adverse events, and resource use outcomes. The acceptability of the study intervention and RCT design will be explored through qualitative methods with 20 participants (patients and informal caregivers) and 12 health professionals. Discussion. A multicentre recruitment approach will provide greater external validity across population characteristics in England. The mixed-methods approach will permit in-depth examination of the intervention and trial design parameters. The findings will inform whether and how a definitive trial may be undertaken to test the effectiveness of this caregiver intervention for patients after hip fracture surgery. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):909–920

Background. Chronic pain is a significant burden and represents a major issue for world healthcare systems. Interventions include medication, surgery, pain management programmes, and social support through peer support groups. These groups are often informal, providing informational, emotional, and social support to members. The aim of this project is to co-produce guidance on how to establish a peer support programme for people living with chronic, non-cancer pain that is informed by evidence, theory, and stakeholder experience. Methods. This project is using Steps 1–4 of the Intervention Mapping (IM) approach to inform the research. Online workshops consisting of people living with chronic pain, third sector representatives, healthcare professionals, and researchers are being used to co-produce the guidance. Results. To date, 2 of the 4 planned workshops have been conducted. These have identified the needs of people living with chronic pain, goals for the peer support programme, and expectations of how a peer support programme should be executed. Topics for inclusion in the programme and their content have been identified, with further workshops to refine this planned. The final stage of this project will identify methods of delivery, specific resources that should be developed, and the training to be provided to peer support volunteers. Conclusion. The project has identified the diverse needs of people living with chronic pain and how these may be addressed by a peer support programme. It has identified flexible options that can be recommended to those who want to set up a programme and a variety content that may be included. Conflicts of Interest. None. Sources of Funding. Robert Gordon University

Current treatment options for displaced acetabular fractures in elderly patients include non-surgical management, surgical fixation and surgical fixation with simultaneous hip replacement, the so-called “fix-and-replace”™. There remains a paucity of evidence to guide surgeons in decision making for these difficult injuries. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of performing an appropriately powered RCT between treatment options for acetabular fractures in older patients. This was an NIHR funded feasibility triple-arm RCT with participation from 7 NHS MTCs. Patients older than 60 were recruited if they had an acetabular fracture deemed sufficiently displaced for the treating surgeon to consider surgical fixation. Randomisation was performed on a 1:1:1 basis. The three treatment arms were non-surgical management, surgical fixation and fix-and-replace. Feasibility was assessed by willingness of patients to participate and clinicians to recruit, drop out rate, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation for the full trial and completion rates to inform design of a future definitive trial. EQ-5D was the primary outcome measure at 6 months, OHS and Disability Rating Index were secondary outcome measures. Of 117 eligible patients, 60 were randomised whilst 50 declined study participation. Nine patients did not receive their allocated intervention. Analysis was performed on an intention to treat basis. During the study period 4 patients withdrew before final review, 4 patients died and 1 was lost to follow-up. The estimated sample size for a full scale study was calculated to be 1474 participants for an EQ-5D MCID of 0.06 with a power of 0.8. This feasibility study suggests a full scale trial would require international collaboration. This study also has provided observed safety data regarding mortality and morbidity for the fix-and-replace procedure to aid surgeons in the decision-making process when considering treatment options

There are a number of patients in whom hip preservation surgery is not indicated as they have developed signs of early osteoarthritis, and nor can they have a hip replacement as they are too early in the disease process. The use of PRP in OA of the hip has not been studied systematically and this study concisely collates all the available data in the use of PRP in Hip OA. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess intra-articular platelet-rich plasma as a therapeutic intervention for hip osteoarthritis, including the duration of efficacy, influence of dose and composition of PRP, and the incidence of adverse effects. We performed literature searches on the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, WEB OF SCIENCE, COCHRANE and SCOPUS databases, and PRSIMA guidelines were followed. Data was pooled using random effects meta-analysis. We assessed quality of the included studies using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) instrument, with an additional assessment for Randomised Controlled Trials with the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Eight studies were included in the analysis, with data from a total of 331 patients. PRP significantly reduced pain compared to baseline at multiple timepoints, with the greatest effect at 1–2mo follow-up. PRP only significantly improved function at the 1–2mo follow-up. A significantly larger reduction in pain was achieved with a single injection or PRP compared to multiple injections, a total injected dose of PRP <15mL compared to ≥15mL or using a leukocyte-poor PRP preparation compared to leukocyte-rich PRP. There were no lasting adverse effects. Low and moderate quality evidence suggests that PRP reduces pain and improves function at endpoint compared to baseline. Moderate quality evidence suggests a larger reduction in pain is achieved with a single injection of PRP compared to multiple injections, and low quality evidence attributes a larger reduction of pain with a total injected dose of PRP <15mL compared to ≥15mL or using leukocyte-poor PRP compared to leukocyte-rich PRP

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement of physician assistants (PAs) in the triaging of patients with Low Back Pain (LBP) based on self-reported data. Patients and methods. A cross sectional vignette study among four PAs was carried out. Vignettes (cases) were constructed including 26 factors that can be self-reported, identified in literature that have predictive value in treatment outcomes (for example red flags indicating serious underlying conditions and yellow flags indicating psychosocial factors). All vignettes were randomly assigned to the PAs who should determine what intervention would be most optimal to the patient (rehabilitation, injections, medications, surgery, primary care psychology, primary care physical therapy). PAs were allowed to advise more than one intervention. Per vignette, 3 PAs were assigned randomly to advise on intervention. Fleish kappas were calculated to determine the interrater reliability. Results. Twenty-five vignettes were judged by 3 of the 4 PAs. Per advise, Fleish kappa values varied between k=0.65 for surgery and medication to k=0.77 for rehabilitation, which can be interpreted as substantial agreement. Conclusion. Based on self-reported data provided by patients, PAs can triage patients with substantial agreement. Adding more information based on history, physical examination and imaging, may influence these outcomes. This study adds to the merit of using questionnaires for guiding clinicians in their triaging process. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Introduction. While interdisciplinary protocols and expedited surgical treatment improve management of geriatric hip fractures, the impact of such interventions on patients undergoing specifically arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture (FNF) has not been well studied. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of an interdisciplinary hip fracture protocol for patients undergoing arthroplasty for acute FNF. Methods. In 2017, our tertiary care institution implemented a standardized interdisciplinary hip fracture protocol. We conducted a retrospective review of adult patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty (HA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) for FNF from July 2012 – March 2020, and compared patient characteristics, hospitalization characteristics, and outcomes between those treated before and after protocol implementation. Results. 157 patients were treated before implementation (22.3% THA), and 114 patients were treated after implementation (32.5% THA). Demographics and medical comorbidities were similar before and after protocol implementation. Patients who underwent HA were older (82.1 vs 71.1 years, p<0.001), more medically complex (Charlson Comorbidity Index 6.4 vs 4.1, p<0.001), and more likely to develop delirium (8.5% vs 0%, p=0.024) than those who underwent THA. Patients treated after implementation had reduced time between admission and operative management (24.1 vs 46.5 hours, p=0.042), decreased rate of major complications (0% vs 12.7%, p<0.001), decreased hospital length of stay (LOS) (5.2 vs 6.4 days, p=0.008), increased rate of discharge to home (26.3% vs 14.7%, p=0.03), and decreased 365-day mortality (14.6% vs 26.1%, p=0.049). There were no significant differences between post-protocol and pre-protocol, respectively, 90-day readmission (18.2% vs 21.7%, p=0.53) or 30-day mortality (3.7% vs 5.1%, p=1.0). Conclusion. This interdisciplinary protocol reduced time to operative management, hospital LOS, in-hospital complications, and one-year mortality for patients who underwent arthroplasty for FNF, without increasing readmission or non-home discharge. Such interventions are critical in improving outcomes and reducing costs for an aging population

Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthritis is a common and disabling condition that can be treated with an operative procedure. Before operative measures, patients typically undergo conservative treatment utilizing methods such as physical therapy and injections. This study aims to determine what clinical modalities are being used for preoperative evaluation and nonoperative therapy and the associated cost prior to operative intervention. We queried Truven Market Scan, a large insurance provider database to identify patients undergoing CMC arthroplasty from 2010 to 2017. Patients were identified by common Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for CMC arthroplasty. All associated CPT codes listed for each patient during the 1 year period prior to operative intervention were collected and filtered to only include those codes associated with the ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes relating to CMC arthritis. The codes were then categorized as office visits, x-ray, injections, physical therapy, medical devices, and preoperative labs. The frequency and associated cost for each category was determined. There were 44,676 patients who underwent CMC arthroplasty during the study period. A total of $26,319,848.36 was charged during the preoperative period, for an average of $589.13 per patient. The highest contributing category to overall cost was office visits (42.1%), followed by injections (13.5%), and then physical therapy (11.1%). The most common diagnostic modality was x-ray, which was performed in 74.7% of patients and made up 11.0% of total charges. Only 49% of patients received at least one injection during the preoperative period and the average number of injections per patient was 1.72. Patients who were employed full time were more likely to receive two or more injections prior to surgery compared to patients who had retired (47% of full-time workers; 34% of retirees). The modalities used for the preoperative evaluation and conservative treatment of CMC arthritis and the associated cost are important to understand in order to determine the most successful and cost-effective treatment plan for patients. Surprisingly, despite the established evidence supporting clinical benefits, many patients do not undergo corticosteroid injections. With office visits being the largest contributor to overall costs, further inquiry into the necessity of multiple visits and efforts to combine visits, can help to reduce cost. Also, with the advent of telemedicine it may be possible to reduce visit cost by utilizing virtual medicine. Determining the best use of telemedicine and its effectiveness are areas for future investigation

Cartilage lesions occur as a result of joint trauma, and progressively degenerate over time leading to osteoarthritis (OA). Early intervention therapies to repair the initial tissue damage have the potential to delay or prevent the onset of OA. We have developed two acellular treatments; 1) an injectable proteoglycan-like self-assembling hydrogel for the repair of ICRS grade 1 lesions, and 2) a decellularised xenogeneic osteochondral scaffold for surgical grafting in grade 2–4 lesions. We produced an in vitro glycosaminoglycan depleted grade 1 lesion model using porcine cartilage. Peptide-chondroitin sulphate mixture was injected and spontaneously gelled in situ. Cartilage resistance to deformation was increased by 50 %. Decellularised porcine osteochondral scaffolds which maintain the native tissue composition and architecture whilst being immunocompatible were successfully developed and are currently undergoing in vivo assessment in an ovine critical size condylar defect model. Incorporation of the subchondral bone in osteochondral scaffolds is intended to improve osseointegration; implanted decellularised bone-only scaffolds in sheep exhibited superb osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties in a proof-of-concept study. We envisage that our early intervention therapies will be employed clinically to maintain or restore functional hyaline-like cartilage across the whole range of early chondral pathologies and prevent the onset of OA

Around 20% of patients who have total knee replacement find that they experience long-term pain afterwards. There is a pressing need for better treatment and management for patients who have this kind of pain but there is little evidence about how to improve care. To address this gap we are developing a complex intervention comprising a clinic to assess potential causes of a patient's long-term pain after knee replacement and onwards referral to appropriate, existing services. The Medical Research Council recommends that development of complex interventions include several stages of development and refinement and involvement of stakeholders. This study comprises the penultimate stage in the comprehensive development of this intervention. Earlier stages included a survey of current practice, focus groups with healthcare professionals, a systematic review of the literature and expert deliberation. Healthcare professionals from diverse clinical backgrounds with experience of caring for patients with long-term pain after knee replacement were sent a study information pack. Professionals who wished to participate were asked to return their signed consent form and completed study questionnaire to the research team. Participants rated the appropriateness of different aspects of the assessment process and care pathway from 1–9 (not appropriate to very appropriate). Data were collated and a document prepared, consisting of anonymised mean appropriateness ratings and summaries of free-text comments. This document was then discussed in 4 facilitated meetings with healthcare professional held at the future trial centres. A summary report and revised care pathway was then prepared and sent to participants for further comments. 28 professionals completed the questionnaire and/or attended a meeting. Participants included surgeons, physiotherapists, nurses, pain specialists and rheumatologists. Mean appropriateness scores ranged from 6.9 to 8.4. Taking a score of 7–9 as agreement, consensus was achieved that the assessment should be performed at 3 months post-operative by an extended scope practitioner/nurse, treatment be guided by a standardised assessment of pain, and treatment individualised. There was also agreement that referrals in the care pathway to surgical review, GP and pain clinics were appropriate. Nurse-led/self-monitoring was rated lower (6.9) because of considerations about the need to ensure that patients receive appropriate support, follow-up and referral to other services. This work demonstrates the research methods that can be used to refine the design of a complex intervention. The process and findings enable refinement of an intervention for patients with long-term pain after knee replacement. The next stage of intervention development will assess the acceptability and reliability of the assessment process, and the usability of the intervention's standard operating procedures. The intervention will then be evaluated by a larger research team in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial, starting in late 2016