To analyse the causes and factors associated with mortality in patients admitted to ASCI unit in a low- or middle-income country. The study was performed at a Tertiary Hospital at Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town South Africa. Data between 1996 –2022 were retrospectively collected from hospital records of patients admitted to the ASCI Unit. There was approximately 3223 admissions for the study period. 682 patients were confirmed dead 87% were male and 64% were unemployed. The mean age was 46 years (ranging from 14 – 87 years). A 1/3 of injuries were caused by a MVA, a ¼ by a fall (low energy and from a height), and 1/5 by a gunshot wound. Average length of stay was 47 days (SD = 52 days), ranging from as short as 1 day to 512 days for one patient. Majority (65%) were admitted for more than a week but less than 2 months 32% were ventilated, and 17% with a CPAP facemask. 10% of patients had a pre-existing ulcer prior to admission. 65% of patients had surgery via the posterior approach, 33% via the anterior approach. On average patients died within 5 years of being admitted to hospital, ranging from dying in the same year as the injury to 20 years later. 73% of the deaths were classified as natural deaths and 20% as unnatural. There is a high mortality in patients with acute spinal cord injury, causes are multifactorial, and in depth critical analyses is required to improve clinical outcomes and rationalise resource allocation

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:222–228.

Aim

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents significant challenges to healthcare systems globally. Orthopaedic surgeons are at risk of contracting COVID-19 due to their close contact with patients in both outpatient and theatre environments. The aim of this review was to perform a literature review, including articles of other coronaviruses, to formulate guidelines for orthopaedic healthcare staff.

Introduction. Surgical spacesuits are in widespread use. Only one previous study (JBJS 1998) has assessed the quality of the environment within the space suit. They demonstrated that surgical spacesuits could allow re-breathing of carbon dioxide (CO. 2. ). However, they had no control group and performed a vigorous exercise protocol which may have been an unfair test. The design of helmet systems has also evolved in the last decade. We have conducted the first investigation into CO. 2. levels inside the modern space suit. There is a Workplace Exposure Limit for inspired CO. 2. as determined by the Health and Safety Executive (UK), which is 0.506kPa. We wondered whether re-breathing of CO. 2. in space suits would lead to inspired CO. 2. which breaches this level. Methods. We used an anaesthetic room gas analyzer via nasal cannulae to measure inspired (ICO. 2. ) levels in 12 healthy volunteers. Readings were taken while wearing a surgical space suit with the fan on high and low settings. These were compared with a normal surgical facemask. Readings were repeated on mild exertion to simulate the effort of performing arthroplasty surgery. Results. [Frequency of ICO2 >0.5kPa (12 subjects)]. Discussion. Despite the design modifications, modern space suits allow re-breathing of CO. 2. This is more marked with exertion and with low fan settings where ICO. 2. can exceed workplace limits. This may account for symptoms of headache and drowsiness reported after a prolonged period in the suit during arthroplasty surgery. We recommend the use of high fan settings at all times