Objectives. Our aim to study the incidence, demographics, inpatient stay, use of imaging and outcomes of patients who have non-operatively managed NOF fractures. Study Design & Methods. The data was collected retrospectively for the last 14 years (Jan 2009- Jan 2023) of all non-operatively managed NOF fractures at a level 2 trauma centre. The data was collected from the trauma board, electronic patient records, radiographs, and National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD). The data collected as demographic details, fracture classification, any reasons for non-operative management, mortality and further surgical management was done. Patients who died or transferred to other sites for specialist surgery were excluded. Results. Our results showed that 1.7% (62/4132) of NOF fractures were managed non-operatively at our institution. The reasons for non-operative management were as follows, medically unwell 45% (n = 28) in whom operative risk was thought to outweigh benefit and risk of death was high within the 48 - 72 hrs of admission. The second group patients, minimal or no pain and old fractures with comfortable mobilisation 55% (n = 34). Out of 34 /62 patients who were mobilised, 14% (5/34) of this patient subgroup subsequently required surgical intervention for failed non-operative management. In the medically unwell group (28/62) the 30-day mortality was 32% (12/28) with a 1-year mortality rate of 42% (17/28). The patients who were mobilised (34/62) the 30-day mortality was 6% (4/34) with a 1-year mortality rate of 20% (5/34). The combined average 1 year mortality for this cohort was 35% (22/62). Conclusions. Our study showed higher mortality rate for medically unwell group 42%. The patients whose fractures are stable enough to allow them to mobilise comfortably showed 20% 1-year mortality rate and 14% surgical intervention needed in 14 % (5/34) patients. We note that an analysis is necessary to assess the functional outcomes of this subgroup, as well as the potential cost implications. The combined average 1 year mortality for this cohort was 35% (22/62) which was due to the high-risk factors in medically unwell group

Acetabular fractures present a challenge. Anatomical reduction can be achieved by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). However, in elderly patients with complex fracture patterns and osteoporotic bone stock, “fix and replace” has become an option in the management of these injuries. This involves ORIF of the acetabulum to enable insertion of a press fit cup and subsequent cemented femoral stem at the index surgery. A Retrospective analysis of all operatively managed acetabular fractures by a regional Pelvic and Acetabular Trauma service (01/01/2018-30/05/2023) STATA used for analysis. 34 patients undergoing “fix and replace” surgery. Of the 133 patients managed with ORIF, 21 subsequently required Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Mean follow up was 2.7 years versus 5.1. There was no statistical significance between the two groups with regards to BMI or sex. Mean age in the “fix and replace” group was 68 compared to 48 in the ORIF and subsequent THA group. This reached statistical significance between the two groups (p=0.001).ASA and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3 and 3 in “fix and replace” and 2 and 1.2 in ORIF to THA group) and Charlson Comorbidity Index both were statistically significantly different (p=0.006 and p=0.027, respectively). High energy mechanism of injury accounted for 56% of the “fix and replace” group compared to 48% in the ORIF to THA. 74% of “fix and replace” were associated fractures compared to 53% of ORIF to THA. Wait to surgery was 3 days for “fix and replace” while 186 days was the mean wait time from listing to THA for the ORIF to THA group. Complication rate was 41% versus 43% in the two groups. 14% in the ORIF to THA group developed PJI versus 6% in “fix and replace”. Fix and replace allows early mobilisation in frailer, elderly patients. Our results show fewer returns to theatre and less PJI in patients having arthroplasty as part of “fix and replace” than subsequent to Open reduction internal fixation

The SPAIRE technique (Saving Piriformis And Internus, Repair Externus) was first described in 2016 and an approach to the hip in the interval between the inferior gemellus and quadratus femoris can be used for both hemi- and total hip arthroplasty. The HemiSPAIRE technique in hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures has been compared with the standard lateral approach (advocated by NICE) in a pragmatic, superiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial into postoperative mobility and function. This NIHR funded study was recruited between November 2019 and April 2022 and the results are reported in this presentation. The author has used the SPAIRE technique in 1026 routine primary total hip replacements since February 2016. The technique is described along with results from NJR data. SPAIRE is most challenging in patients with small anatomy, reduced offset, with an external rotation deformity. Particularly in these, but in all cases, MAKO robotic assistance facilitates accurate implantation of prostheses and precise recreation of biomechanics. The MAKO robot has been used in all cases since 2018 and SPAIRE/MAKO is now the standard of care in the author's practice. To evaluate whether robotic-assisted tendon-sparing posterior approaches (piriformis sparing and SPAIRE), improve patient outcomes in total hip arthroplasty compared with a robotic-assisted standard posterior approach, the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme has recently funded the HIPSTER trial (HIP Surgical Techniques to Enhance Rehabilitation). This is a single-centre, double-blinded, parallel three-arm, randomised, controlled, superiority trial; recruitment is in progress. The greatest value of robotic assistance may be when it is used in combination with tendon-sparing surgery. Data is being gathered to evaluate whether the SPAIRE/MAKO technique confers benefits with regard the speed of post-op mobilisation as well as accelerated return to unrestricted function

Background. Over 55,000 spinal operations are performed annually in the NHS. Effective postoperative analgesia facilitates early mobilisation and assists rehabilitation and hospital discharge, but is difficult to achieve with conventional, opioid-based, oral analgesia. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of two alternative techniques, namely intrathecal opioid and the more novel erector-spinae plane blockade, is unknown. The Pain Relief After Instrumented Spinal Surgery (PRAISE) trial aims to evaluate these techniques. Methods. PRAISE is a multicentre, prospective, parallel group, patient-blinded, randomised trial, seeking to recruit 456 adult participants undergoing elective, posterior lumbar-instrumented spinal surgery from up to 25 NHS hospitals. Participants will be randomised 1:1:1 to receive (1) Usual Care with local wound infiltration, (2) Intrathecal Opioid plus Usual Care with local wound infiltration or (3) Erector Spinae Plane blockade plus Usual Care with no local wound infiltration. The primary outcome is pain on movement on a 100mm visual analogue scale at 24 hours post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include pain at rest, leg pain, quality of recovery (QoR-15), postoperative opioid consumption, time to mobilisation, length of hospital stay, health utility (EQ-5D-5L), adverse events and resource use. Parallel economic evaluation will estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results. Differences in the primary outcome at 24 hours will be estimated by mixed-effects linear regression modelling, with fixed effects for randomisation factors and other important prognostic variables, and random effects for centre, using the as-randomised population. Treatment effects with 95% confidence intervals will be presented. Conclusion. The study is due to open in May 2024 and complete in 2026. Conflicts of Interest. No conflicts of interest declared. Sources of Funding. NIHR Health Technology Award – grant number NIHR153170. Trial presentations so far. APOMP 2023 and 2024; RCOA conference, York, November 2023; Faculty of Pain Management training day, London, February 2024

Introduction. Distal femur fracture fixation in elderly presents significant challenges due to osteoporosis and associated comorbidities. There has been an evolution in the management of these fractures with a description of various surgical techniques and fixation methods; however, currently, there is no consensus on the standard of care. Non-union rates of up to 19% and mortality rates of up to 26 % at one year have been reported in the literature. Delay in surgery and delay in mobilisation post-operatively have been identified as two main factors for high rate of mortality. As biomechanical studies have proved better stability with dual plating or nail-plate combination, a trend has been shifting for past few years towards rigid fixation to allow early mobilisation. Our study aims to compare outcomes of distal femur fractures managed with either single plate (SP), dual plating (DP) or nail-plate construct (NP). Methods. A retrospective review of patients aged above 65 years with distal femur fractures (both native and peri-prosthetic) who underwent surgical management between June 2020 and May 2023 was conducted. Patients were divided into three groups based on mode of fixation - single plate or dual plating or nail-plate construct. AO/OTA classification was used for non-periprosthetic, and Unified classification system (UCS) was used for periprosthetic fractures. Data on patient demographics, fracture characteristics, surgical details, postoperative complications, re-operation rate, radiological outcomes and mortality rate were evaluated. Primary objective was to compare re-operation rate and mortality rate between 3 groups at 30 days, 6 months and at 1 year. Results. A cohort of 32 patients with distal femur fractures were included in this study. 91% were females and mean age was 80.97 (range 68–97). 18 (53%) were non-periprosthetic fracture and 14 (47%) were periprosthetic fractures.18 patients underwent single plate fixation (AO/OTA 33A – 8, 33B/C – 2, UCS V3B – 5, V3C – 3),10 patients had dual plate fixation (AO/OTA 33A – 1, 33B/C – 4, UCS V3B – 3, V3C – 2) and 4 patients underwent nail-plate combination fixation (AO/OTA 33A – 4). 70.5% patients had surgery within 36 hours of admission and 90% within 48 hours. Analysis showed no re-operation at 30 days, 6 months in all 3 groups. At 1 year one patient had re-operation in dual-plating periprosthetic group (Distal femur replacement done for failed fixation). Three patients (16%) in single plate group had re-operation at 2 years (2 for peri-implant fracture and 1 for infection). None of the patients treated with Nail-plate combination had re-operation. Mortality rate at 30 days was 0% in among all the 3 groups. At 6 months, it was 16% in single plate group and 0% in DP and NP groups at 6 months and at 1 year mortality rate was 27% in SP group, 10% in DP and 0% in NP group. Combined mortality rate was 0% at 30 days, 9% at 6 months and 18.7% at one year. Conclusion. Our analysis provides insights into fixation methods of distal femur fractures in elderly patients. We conclude that a lower re-operation rate and mortality rate can be achieved with early surgery and rigid fixation with either dual plating or nail-plate construct to allow early mobilisation. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings and guide the selection of optimal surgical strategies for these challenging fractures

Introduction. Surgical reconstruction of Charcot joint deformity is increasingly being offered to patients. In our centre a hybrid type fixation technique is utilised: internal and external fixation. This combined fixation has better wound management and earlier mobilisation in this deconditioned patient group. The aim of this study was to assess clinical, radiological and patient reported outcomes for all patients who underwent this hybrid technique. Methods. This is a prospective observational case series of all patients who underwent surgical reconstruction of Charcot foot deformity in a single centre between June 2017 and June 2023. Patient demographics, smoking status, diabetic control and BMI were recorded. Outcomes were determined from case notes and included clinical outcomes (complications, return to theatre, amputation and mortality) radiological outcomes and patient reported outcomes. The follow up period was 1–7 years post operatively. Results. 42 reconstructions were included. At the time of surgery the mean age was 59.1 years (29 – 91 years), average HbA1c was 65.2 (33–103); this did not correlate with return to theatre rate. 4 procedures were internal fixation alone (9.5%), 3 external fixation alone (7.1%) and 35 were combined fixation (83.3%). At most recent follow up 7 patients were deceased (16.7%), 2 patients had ipsilateral amputations, 2 had contralateral amputations. 11 patients had issues with recurrent ulcerations. Excluding refreshing of frames and operations on the contralateral side, 17 patients (40%) returned to theatre. We aim to present a detailed analysis of the rate of post-operative complications, return to theatre, radiographic outcomes and patient reported outcomes. Conclusion. This is the largest UK based case series of hybrid type Charcot joint reconstructions and shows that hybrid fixation is a viable option for patients undergoing Charcot joint reconstruction. To best confirm findings and determine which patients have the best post-operative prognosis a larger multi-centre study is required

Introduction. Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) account for 10.7% of all tendon and ligament injuries and causes lasting muscular deficits and have a profound impact on patients’ quality of life. 1,2. The incidence, characteristics and management of ATR in the United Kingdom is poorly understood. Method. Data was collected prospectively from University Hospitals of Leicester Emergency Department (ED) between January 2016 and December 2020 and analysed retrospectively. The medical records were reviewed to determine management protocols (surgical/non-surgical) and limited mobilisation (VACOped™ boot) duration. Leicestershire population data was taken from Leicestershire County Council demography report. Findings. 277 individuals were diagnosed with an ATR during the 4-year period. The mean (SD) annual incidence was 56 (±6) ATR. An incidence rate of 8.02 per 100,000 people per annum. The average characteristics of those experiencing an ATR is male (78.3%), 46.8yrs old (±14.4), body mass index 29.1 (±6.3). Median (IQR) number of comorbidities 1 (2) and duration to present to ED was 0 days (1). The main mechanism of rupture was sporting activity (62.1%). 97.4% were non-surgically managed using a limited mobilisation boot (VACOped). The boot was worn for an average of 62.6 days (±8.9). 94 participants provided pre-ATR Achilles symptoms data. 16% (n=15/94) of participants reported a previous contralateral ATR. 7.4% reported a re-rupture (n=7/94). 15.4% (n=14/91) reported an Achilles tendinopathy on the ipsilateral side prior to ATR. 7.7% (n=7/91) reported bilateral Achilles tendinopathy and 1.1% (n=1/91) reported contralateral Achilles tendinopathy prior to ATR. Conclusion. The incidence of ATR is 8.02 cases per 100,000 people per annum. This is the first UK data on ATR incidence. Most ATR were managed non-surgically in this cohort. The majority of ruptures occurred during sporting activity. Those that had previous Achilles symptoms (24.2%) indicate tendons are not always asymptomatic prior to ATR

Introduction. Day stay surgery for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions is an increasingly common practice and has driven clinicians to come up with postoperative pain regimes that allow same day mobilisation and a safe and timely discharge. There is a paucity of literature surrounding the use of intraosseous (IO) ropivacaine used as a Bier's block to provide both intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in lower limb surgery. Methods. This patient blinded, pilot study randomised 15 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction to receive either IO ropivacaine 1.5 or 2.0 mg/kg; or 300 mg of ropivacaine as local infiltration (standard of care). Toxic plasma levels of ropivacaine have been defined in the literature and therefore the primary outcome for this study was arterial plasma concentration of ropivacaine as a means to determine its safety profile. Samples were taken via an arterial line at prespecified times after tourniquet deflation. Secondary outcomes that we were interested in included immediate postoperative pain scores using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and perioperative opioid equivalent consumption. Results. Participants had a mean age of 27.8 (SD 9.2) years and 87% (13/15) were male. All patients in the intervention group receiving IO ropivacaine had plasma concentrations well below the threshold for central nervous system (CNS) toxicity (0.60 µg/ml). The highest plasma concentration was achieved in the intervention group receiving 1.5 mg/kg dose of ropivacaine reaching 3.59 mg/ml. This would equate to 0.22 µg/ml of free plasma ropivacaine. There were no differences across the three groups regarding pain scores or perioperative opioid consumption. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that IO administration of 0.2% ropivacaine is both safe and effective in reducing perioperative pain in patients undergoing ACL reconstruction. There may be scope to increase the IO dose further or utilise other analgesics via the IO regional route to improve perioperative pain relief

Introduction. Management of Vancouver type B1 and C periprosthetic fractures in elderly patients requires fixation and an aim for early mobilisation but many techniques restrict weightbearing due to re-fracture risk. We present the clinical and radiographic outcomes of our technique of total femoral plating (TFP) to allow early weightbearing whilst reducing risk of re-fracture. Methods. A single-centre retrospective cohort study was performed including twenty-two patients treated with TFP for fracture around either hip or knee replacements between May 2014 and December 2017. Follow-up data was compared at 6, 12 and 24 months. Primary outcomes were functional scores (Oxford Hip or Knee score (OHS/OKS)), Quality of Life (EQ-5D) and satisfaction at final follow-up (Visual Analogue Score (VAS)). Secondary outcomes were radiographic fracture union and complications. Results. Mean OHS and OKS was 50.25, EQ-5D score was >4 for all modalities, VAS was 64.4/100. Radiographs demonstrated bony union in 58% at 3 months and 76% at 6 months. We identified no case of re-fracture however non-union occurred in 4 patients. No other operative complications were identified. Conclusion. These results suggest that TFP may be a safe, viable option for management of periprosthetic fractures around stable implants allowing the benefit of early weightbearing, satisfactory outcomes and low re-fracture risk

Following the establishment of regional Major Trauma Networks in England in 2012, there were concerns that pressures regarding resource allocation in Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) may have a detrimental impact on the care of patients with hip fractures in these hospitals. This study aimed to compare outcomes in hip fracture care between MTCs and trauma units (TUs). National Hip Fracture Database data was extracted from 01/01/2015 to 31/12/2022 for all hospitals in England. Outcome measures included perioperative medical and physiotherapy assessments, time to surgery, consultant supervision in theatre, Best Practice Tariff (BPT) compliance, discharge to original residence, and mortality. Data was pooled and weighted for MTCs and remaining hospitals (TUs). A total of 487,089 patients with hip fractures were included from 167 hospitals (23 MTCs and 144 TUs). MTCs achieved marginally higher rates of orthogeriatrician assessment within 72 hours of admission (91.1% vs 90.4%, p<0.001) and mobilisation out of bed by first postoperative day (81.9% vs 79.7%, p<0.001). A lower proportion of patients underwent surgery by the day after admission in MTCs (65.2% vs 69.7%, p<0.001). However, there was significantly higher consultant surgeon and anaesthetist supervision rates during surgery in MTCs (71.8% vs 61.6%, p<0.001). There was poorer compliance with BPT criteria in MTCs (57.3% vs 60.4%, p<0.001), and proportionately fewer MTC patients were discharged to their original residence (63.5% vs 60.4%, p<0.001). There was no difference between MTCs and TUs in 30-day mortality (6.8% vs 6.8%, p=0.825). This study demonstrates that MTCs have greater difficulty in providing prompt surgery to hip fracture patients. However, their marginally superior perioperative care outcomes appear to compensate for this, as their mortality rates are similar to TUs. These findings suggest that the regionalisation of major trauma in England has not significantly compromised the overall care of hip fracture patients

The management of femoral bone loss is challenging during revision hip arthroplasty. In patients with Paprosky grade IIIB and IV defects, obtaining fixation and rotational stability using traditional surgical constructs is difficult. The use of a custom-made internal proximal femoral replacement prostheses has been proposed as a solution in patients, with severe femoral bone stock loss. However, there is a paucity in the literature on their use and long-term outcomes. We report on the clinical and radiological results of our cohort. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent internal proximal femoral replacement for revision hip arthroplasty between April 1996 and April 2019. All patients had at least 2 years of follow-up time. 160 patients underwent limb salvage at our institution using internal proximal femoral replacement. The mean follow-up was 79.7 months (S.D 41.3). Indications for revision included periprosthetic fractures, aseptic loosening, and deep infection. The mean Oxford hip score increased from 13.8 (0–22) to 31.5 (18–43) (paired t-test, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier prosthesis survival analysis with revision as the endpoint was 87% at 5 years. None required revision of the femoral stem. There were four dislocations (5%) and there was failure to eradicate the deep infection in four. This technique allows instant distal fixation, allowing for early mobilisation. Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes are encouraging and the complication rates are acceptable for this patient group

Within an ageing population, the morbidity and mortality burden of neck of femur fractures will only worsen. Financially incentivising acute Trusts via the Best Practice Tariff for inpatient care has yielded good results(1,2,3,4) but post-discharge care is still variable. Most importantly, restoring patients to their pre-fracture mobility is key to their quality of life(5,6) and reducing both readmissions to hospital(7,8) and expensive local authority residential care. Unfortunately, physiotherapist vacancies are in their thousands(9,10) leading to waiting times of around three months once discharged(11). In 2019, the Royal Derby Hospital created a novel Hip Fracture Patient Advocate (HFPA) to observe those who have fallen through gaps in community services. It involves monitoring patients’ progression, signposting to appropriate services, flagging issues to the responsible consultant and assisting in physical mobilisation. A retrospective review examined data from patients discharged to their own homes. This included demographics, residential status and mobility, both pre-fracture and at 120 days post-fracture. Mobility was classified into five categories, in line with the national hip fracture database. In 2018, of 238 patients, 41.2% returned to their baseline or increased mobility, and, after the introduction of the HFPA in 2019, this figure increased to 48.2%. In one year, there was a 7% increase in patients recovering their baseline mobility. This is a cost-effective intervention that can successfully improve mobility, leading to improved long-term outcomes. This includes the potential to reduce acute readmissions and the need for residential care, appealing to Integrated Care Boards. It also bridges the gap to primary care to optimise medical management and after further development, could be financially-incentivised via the Best Practice Tariff. Rather than thinking more expensive clinicians are required, this study proposes that a HFPA can garner better outcomes for both the patient and the wider system

Aims. Ankle fractures are common injuries and the third most common fragility fracture. In all, 40% of ankle fractures in the frail are open and represent a complex clinical scenario, with morbidity and mortality rates similar to hip fracture patients. They have a higher risk of complications, such as wound infections, malunion, hospital-acquired infections, pressure sores, veno-thromboembolic events, and significant sarcopaenia from prolonged bed rest. Methods. A modified Delphi method was used and a group of experts with a vested interest in best practice were invited from the British Foot and Ankle Society (BOFAS), British Orthopaedic Association (BOA), Orthopaedic Trauma Society (OTS), British Association of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgeons (BAPRAS), British Geriatric Society (BGS), and the British Limb Reconstruction Society (BLRS). Results. In the first stage, there were 36 respondents to the survey, with over 70% stating their unit treats more than 20 such cases per year. There was a 50:50 split regarding if the timing of surgery should be within 36 hours, as per the hip fracture guidelines, or 72 hours, as per the open fracture guidelines. Overall, 75% would attempt primary wound closure and 25% would utilize a local flap. There was no orthopaedic agreement on fixation, and 75% would permit weightbearing immediately. In the second stage, performed at the BLRS meeting, experts discussed the survey results and agreed upon a consensus for the management of open elderly ankle fractures. Conclusion. A mutually agreed consensus from the expert panel was reached to enable the best practice for the management of patients with frailty with an open ankle fracture: 1) all units managing lower limb fragility fractures should do so through a cohorted multidisciplinary pathway. This pathway should follow the standards laid down in the "care of the older or frail orthopaedic trauma patient" British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guideline. These patients have low bone density, and we should recommend full falls and bone health assessment; 2) all open lower limb fragility fractures should be treated in a single stage within 24 hours of injury if possible; 3) all patients with fragility fractures of the lower limb should be considered for mobilisation on the day following surgery; 4) all patients with lower limb open fragility fractures should be considered for tissue sparing, with judicious debridement as a default; 5) all patients with open lower limb fragility fractures should be managed by a consultant plastic surgeon with primary closure wherever possible; and 6) the method of fixation must allow for immediate unrestricted weightbearing. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):236–242

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and Reverse Total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are two of the most performed shoulder operations today. Traditionally postoperative rehabilitation included a period of immobilisation, protecting the joint and allowing time for soft tissue healing. This immobilisation period may significantly impact a patient's quality of life (Qol)and ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL's). This period of immobilisation could be safely avoided, accelerating return to function and improving postoperative QoL. This systematic review examines the safety of early mobilisation compared to immobilisation after shoulder arthroplasty focusing on outcomes at one year. Methods. A systematic review was performed as per the PRISMA guidelines. Results on functional outcome and shoulder range of motion were retrieved. Six studies were eligible for inclusion, resulting in 719 patients, with arthroplasty performed on 762 shoulders, with information on mobilisation protocols on 736 shoulders (96.6%) and 717 patients (99.7%). The patient cohort comprised 250 males (34.9%) and 467 females (65.1%). Of the patients that successfully completed follow-up, 81.5% underwent RSA (n = 600), and 18.4% underwent TSA (n = 136). Overall, 262 (35.6%) patients underwent early postoperative mobilisation, and 474 shoulders were (64.4%) immobilised for a length of time. Immobilised patients were divided into three subgroups based on the period of immobilisation: three, four, or six weeks. There were 201 shoulders (27.3%) immobilised for three weeks, 77 (10.5%) for four weeks and 196 (26.6%) for six weeks. Five of the six manuscripts found no difference between clinical outcomes at one year when comparing early active motion versus immobilisation after RSA or TSA. Early mobilisation is a safe postoperative rehabilitation pathway following both TSA and RSA. This may lead to an accelerated return to function and improved quality of life in the postoperative period

Abstract. Background. Daycase pathways which aim to discharge patients the same day following Unicompartmental Knee Replacement have been introduced in some centres, though most continue with Standard pathways. While Daycase pathways have cost savings, recovery data comparing pathways is limited. This study aims to compare patient-reported early recovery between Daycase and Standard pathways following UKR. Method. This study was carried out in two centres that originally used the same Standard recovery pathway for UKR. In one centre, the Standard pathway was modified into a Daycase pathway. 26 Daycase-Outpatient, 11 Daycase-Inpatient, and 18 Standard patients were recruited. Patients completed the Oxford Arthroplasty Early Recovery Score (OARS) and SF-36 (Acute) measure between Days 1–42. Results. Standard patients had significantly better Day-1 scores than Daycase patients, but this difference rapidly diminished, and from Day-3 onwards both groups had near-identical scores (OARS Day-1, 59 vs 37, p=0.002, stemming from differences in Pain, Nausea/Feeling-Unwell, Function/Mobility subscores p=0.003,0.014,0.011. OARS Day-3 48 vs 49, p=0.790). Daycase-Outpatients had a higher overall OARS (p=0.002), recovering 1–2 weeks faster than Daycase-Inpatients. OARS subscores demonstrated that Daycase-Outpatients had better Pain, Nausea/Feeling-Unwell, Fatigue/Sleep scores (p=0.020,0.0004,0.019 respectively). SF-36 scores corroborate OARS scores. Conclusion. The Standard cohort had better Day-1 scores than the Daycase cohort, likely due to later mobilisation and stronger inpatient analgesia; these differences diminished by Day-3. Daycase-Outpatients recovered substantially faster than Daycase-Inpatients – likely due to the factors that delayed their discharge. The convergence of scores at 6 weeks demonstrates that both pathways have similar early recovery outcomes

The development and implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are of particular interest in elective orthopaedics due to clinical benefits and cost effectiveness. The Wycombe Arthroplasty Rapid-Recovery Pathway (WARP) was designed to streamline hip and knee joint arthroplasty to reduce time spent in hospital whilst optimising outcomes in an NHS District General Hospital. 966 patients were admitted to Wycombe General Hospital for primary elective joint replacement (60 UKR, 446 THR, 460 TKR) during the period 1st September 2020 to 31st September 2022. The WARP pathway was used for 357 (37%) patients (32 UKR, 155 THR, 170 TKR) and the standard “non-WARP” pathway was used for 609 (63%) patients (28 UKR 291 THR, 290 TKR). Data was collected on length of stay, time of mobilisation, number of physiotherapy sessions, and inpatient morbidity. Average length of stay following UKR was 0.75 days for WARP vs 2.96 for non-WARP patients, following THR was 2.17 days for WARP vs 4.17 for non-WARP patients, following TKR was 3.4 days for WARP vs 3.92 for non-WARP patients. Day-0 mobilisation after UKR was achieved in 97% of WARP vs 12% of non-WARP patients, after THR in 43% of WARP vs 14% of non-WARP patients, after TKR in 33% of WARP vs 11% of non-WARP patients. Same-day discharge was achieved in the WARP cohort in 63% of UKR, 10% of THR, 2% of TKR patients. There were no same-day discharges in the non-WARP cohort. Complications delaying mobilisation (pain, nausea/vomiting, dizziness/low BP) were identified in 8.4% of WARP vs 25% of non-WARP patients. Our cohort study shows that the initiation of WARP Rapid Recovery pathway for joint arthroplasty decreased the average length of stay after UKR by 2.21 days, after THR by 2 days, after TKR by 0.52 days. Time to first mobilisation was decreased significantly by increased rates of same-day mobilisation and reduced rates of postoperative anaesthetic-related complications

Appropriate surgical management of hip fractures has major clinical and economic consequences. Recently IMN use has increased compared to SHS constructs, despite no clear evidence demonstrating superiority of outcome. We therefore set out to provide further evidence about the clinical and economic implications of implant choice when considering hip fracture fixation strategies. A retrospective cohort study using Scottish hip fracture audit (SHFA) data was performed for the period 2016–2022. Patients ≥50 with a hip fracture and treated with IMN or SHS constructs at Scottish Hospitals were included. Comparative analyses, including adjustment for confounders, were performed utilising Multivariable logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes and Mann-Whitney-U tests for non-parametric data. A sub-group analysis was also performed focusing on AO-A1/A2 configurations which utilised additional regional data. Cost differences in Length of Stay (LOS) were calculated using defined costs from the NHS Scotland Costs book. In all analyses p<0.05 denoted significance. 13638 records were included (72% female). 9867 received a SHS (72%). No significant differences were identified in 30 or 60-day survival (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.05, 95%CI 0.90–1.23; p=0.532), (OR 1.10, 95%CI 0.97–1.24; p=0.138) between SHS and IMN's. There was however a significantly lower early mobilisation rate with IMN vs SHS (OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.59–0.70; p<0.001), and lower likelihood of discharge to domicile by day-30 post-admission (OR 0.77, 95%CI 0.71–0.84; p<0.001). Acute and overall, LOS were significantly lower for SHS vs IMN (11 vs 12 days and 20 vs 24 days respectively; p<0.001). Findings were similar across a sub-group analysis of 559 AO A1/A2 fracture configurations. Differences in LOS potentially increases costs by £1230 per-patient, irrespective of the higher costs of IMN's v SHS. Appropriate SHS use is associated with early mobilisation, reduced LOS and likely with reduced cost of treatment. Further research exploring potential reasons for the identified differences in early mobilisation are warranted

Introduction. Ankle fractures in the elderly have been increasing with an ageing but active population and bring with them specific challenges. Medical co-morbidities, a poor soft tissue envelope and a requirement for early mobilisation to prevent morbidity and mortality, all create potential pitfalls to successful treatment. As a result, different techniques have been employed to try and improve outcomes. Total contact casting, both standard and enhanced open reduction internal fixation, external fixation and most recently tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing have all been proposed as suitable treatment modalities. Over the past five years popular literature has begun to herald TTC nailing as an appropriate and contemporary solution to the complex problem of high-risk ankle fragility fractures. We sought to assess whether, within our patient cohort, the outcomes seen supported the statement that TTC has equal outcomes to more traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) when used to treat the high-risk ankle fragility fracture. Materials & Methods. Results of ORIF versus TTC nailing without joint preparation for treatment of fragility ankle fractures were evaluated via retrospective cohort study of 64 patients with high-risk fragility ankle fractures without our trauma centre. We aimed to assess whether results within our unit were equal to those seen within other published studies. Patients were matched 1:1 based on gender, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and ASA score. Patient demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, intra-operative and post-operative complications, discharge destination, union rates, FADI scores and patient mobility were recorded. Results. There were 32 patients within each arm. Mean age was 78.4 (TTC) and 78.3 (ORIF). The CCI was 5.9 in each group respectively with mean ASA 2.9 (TTC) and 2.8 (ORIF). There were two open fractures within each group. Median follow up duration was 26 months. Time to theatre from injury was 8.0 days (TTC) versus 3.3 days (ORIF). There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day, one year or overall mortality at final follow up. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis did however demonstrate that of those patients who died post-operatively the mean time to mortality was significantly shorter in those treated with TTC nailing versus ORIF (20.3 months versus 38.2 months, p=0.013). There was no statistical difference in the overall complication rate between the two groups (46.9% versus 25%, p=0.12). The re-operation rate was twice as high in patients treated with TTC nailing however this was not statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in the FADI scores at final follow up, 72.1±12.9 (TTC) versus 67.9±13.9 (ORIF) nor post-operative mobility status. Conclusions. Within our study TTC nailing with an unprepared joint demonstrated broadly equivalent results to ORIF in the management of high-risk ankle fragility fractures; this replicates findings of previous studies. We did however observe that mean survival was significantly shorter in the TTC group than those treated with ORIF. We believe this may have been contributed to by a delay to theatre due to TTC stabilisation being treated as a sub-specialist operation in our unit at the time. We propose that both TTC and ORIF are satisfactory techniques to stabilise the frail ankle fracture however, similarly to the other fragility fractures, the priority should be on an emergent operation in a timely fashion in order to minimise the associated morbidity and mortality. Further randomised control studies are needed within the area to establish definitive results and a working consensus

Introduction. External fixators are attached to bones with percutaneous pins and wires inserted through soft tissues and bone increasing the risk of infections. Such infections compromise patient outcomes e.g., through pin loosening or loss, failure of fixator to stabilise the fracture, additional surgery, increased pain, and delayed mobilisation. These infections also impact the healthcare system for example, increased OPD visits, hospitalisations, treatments, surgeries and costs. Nurses have a responsibility in the care and management of patients with external fixators and ultimately in the prevention of pin-site infection. Yet, evidence on best practices in the prevention of pin-site infection is limited and variation in pin-site management practices is evident. Various strategies are used for the prevention of pin-site infection including the use of different types of non-medicated and medicated wound dressings. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the use of dry gauze or iodine tulle dressings for the prevention of pin-site infections in patients with lower limb external fixators. Methodology. A retrospective study of patients with lower limb external fixators who attended the research site between 2015–2022. Setting & Sample: The setting was the outpatient's (OPD) orthopaedic clinic in a University Teaching Hospital in Dublin, Ireland. Eligibility Criteria:. Over the age of 16, treated with an Ilizarov, Taylor Spatial frame (TSF) or Limb Reconstruction System (LRS) external fixators on lower limbs,. Pin-sites dressed with dry gauze or iodine tulle,. Those with pre-existing infected wounds close to the pin site and/or were on long term antibiotics were excluded. Follow Up Period: From time of external fixator application to first pin-site infection or removal of external fixator. Outcome Assessment: The primary outcome was pin-site infection, secondary outcomes included but were not limited to frequency of pin-site infection according to types of bone fixation, frequency of pin/wire removal and hospitalisation due to infection. Data analysis: IBM SPSS Version 25 was used for statistical analysis. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted as appropriate. Categorical data were analysed by counting the frequencies (number and percentages) of participants with an event as opposed to counting the number of episodes for each event. Differences between groups were analysed using Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, where appropriate. Continuous variables were reported using mean and standard deviations and difference analysed using a two-sample independent t-test or non-parametric test (Mann-Whitney), where appropriate. Using Kaplan-Meier, survival analysis explored time to development of infection. Ethical approval: granted by local institute Research Ethics Committee on 12th March 2018. Results. During the study period, 97 lower limb external fixators were applied with 43 patients meeting the study eligibility criteria. The mean age was 38 (SD 14.1; median 37) and the majority male (n=32, 74%). At least 50% (n=25) of participants had an IIizarov fixator, with 56% (n=24) of all fixators applied to the tibia and fibula. Pin/wire sites were dressed using iodine (n=26, 61%) or dry gauze dressings (n=15, 35%). The mean age of participants in the iodine group was significantly higher than the dry gauze group (p=.012). The only significant difference between the iodine and dry gauze dressing groups at baseline was age. A total of 30 (70%) participants developed a pin-site infection with 26% (n=11) classified as grade 2 infection. Clinical presentation included redness (n=18, 42%), discharge (n=16, 37%) and pain (n=15, 35%). Over half of participants were prescribed oral antibiotics (n=28, 65%); one required intravenous antibiotics and hospitalization due to pin-site infection. Ten (23%) participants required removal of pin/wires; two due to pin-site infection. There was no association between baseline data and pin-site infection. The median time to developing an infection was 7 weeks (95%, CI 2.7 to 11.29). Overall, there were 21 (81%, n=26) pin-site infections in the iodine group and nine (60%, n=15) in the dry gauze group, difference in proportion and relative risk between the dressing groups were not statistically significant (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.86–2.12; p= .272). There was no association between baseline data, pin-site infection, and type of dressing. Conclusions. At the research site, patients are referred to the OPD orthopaedic clinic from internal and external clinical sites e.g., from Hospital Consultants, General Practitioners and occasionally from multidisciplinary teams, throughout Ireland. Our retrospective observation study found that 97 lower limb external fixators were applied over a seven-year period which is lower than that reported in the literature. However, the study period included the COVID pandemic years (2020 and 2021) which saw a lower number of external fixators applied due to lack of theatre availability, cancelled admissions and social/travel restrictions that resulted in fewer accidents and lower limb trauma cases requiring external fixator application. The study highlighted a high infection rate with 70% of participants developing pin-site infection which is in keeping with findings reporting in other studies. Our study showed that neither an iodine nor dry gauze dressing was successful in preventing pin-site infection. In the iodine group 81% of participants developed infection compared to 60% in the dry gauze group. Given the lack of difference between the two groups consideration needs to be given to the continued use of iodine dressings in the prevention of pin-site infection. Pin-site infections result in a high portion of participants being prescribed antibiotics and, in an era, that stresses the importance of antimicrobial stewardship there is a need to implement effective infection prevention and control strategies that minimise infection. Further research is therefore needed to investigate more innovative medicated dressings such as those that contain anti-microbial or anti-bacterial agents

Metacarpal fractures represent up to 33% of all hand fractures; of which the majority can be treated non-operatively. Previous research has shown excellent putcomes with non-operative treatment yet surgical stabilisation is recommended to avoid malrotation and symptomatic shortening. It is unknown whether operative is superior to non-operative treatment in oblique or spiral metacarpal shaft fractures. The aim of the study was to compare non-operative treatment of mobilisation with open surgical stabilisation. 42 adults (≥ 18 years) with a single displaced oblique or spiral metacarpal shaft fractures were randomly assigned in a 1:1 pattern to either non-operative treatment with free mobilisation or operative treatment with open reduction and fixation with lag screws in a prospective study. The primary outcome measure was grip-strength in the injured hand in comparison to the uninjured hand at 1-year follow-up. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score, ranges of motion, metacarpal shortening, complications, time off work, patient satisfaction and costs were secondary outcomes. All 42 patients attended final follow-up after 1 year. The mean grip strength in the non-operative group was 104% (range 73–250%) of the contralateral hand and 96% (range 58–121%) in the operatively treated patients. Mean metacarpal shortening was 5.0 (range 0–9) mm in the non-operative group and 0.6 (range 0–7) mm in the operative group. There were five minor complications and three revision operations, all in the operative group. The costs for non-operative treatment were estimated at 1,347 USD compared to 3,834USD for operative treatment; sick leave was significantly longer in the operative group (35 days, range 0–147) than in the non-operative group (12 days, range 0–62) (p=0.008). When treated with immediate free mobilization single, patients with displaced spiral or oblique metacarpal shaft fractures have outcomes that are comparable to those after operative treatment, despite some metacarpal shortening. Complication rates, costs and sick leave are higher with operative treatment. Early mobilisation of spiral or long oblique single metacarpal fractures is the preferred treatment. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03067454