Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the provision of orthopaedic care across the UK. During the pandemic orthopaedic specialist registrars were redeployed to “frontline” specialties occupying non-surgical roles. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic training in the UK is unknown. This paper sought to examine the role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on postgraduate orthopaedic education. Methods. A 42-point questionnaire was designed, validated, and disseminated via e-mail and an instant-messaging platform. Results. A total of 101 orthopaedic trainees, representing the four nations (Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland), completed the questionnaire. Overall, 23.1% (23/101) of trainees were redeployed to non-surgical roles. Of these, 73% (17/23) were redeployed to intensive treatment units (ITUs), 13% (3/23) to A/E, and 13%(3/23%) to general medicine. Of the trainees redeployed to ITU 100%, (17/17) received formal induction. Non-deployed or returning trainees had a significant reduction in sessions. In total, 42.9% (42/101) % of trainees were not timetabled into fracture clinic, 53% (53/101) of trainees had one allocated theatre list per week, and 63.8%(64/101) of trainees did not feel they obtained enough experience in the attached subspecialty and preferred repeating this. Overall, 93% (93/101) of respondents attended at least one weekly online webinar, with 79% (79/101) of trainees rating these as useful or very useful, while 95% (95/101) trainees attended online deanery teaching which was rated as more useful than online webinars (p = 0.005). Conclusion. Orthopaedic specialist trainees occupied an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has had a significant impact on orthopaedic training. It is imperative this is properly understood to ensure orthopaedic specialist trainees achieve competencies set out in the training curriculum. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:676–682

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore differences in operative autonomy by trainee gender during orthopaedic training in Ireland and the UK, and to explore differences in operative autonomy by trainee gender with regard to training year, case complexity, index procedures, and speciality area.

While surgeon-industry relationships in orthopaedics have a critical role in advancing techniques and patient outcomes, they also present the potential for conflict of interest (COI) and increased risk of bias in surgical education. Consequently, robust processes of disclosure and mitigation of potential COI have been adopted across educational institutions, professional societies, and specialty journals. The past years have seen marked growth in the use of online video-based surgical education platforms that are commonly used by both trainees and practicing surgeons. However, it is unclear to what extent the same COI disclosure and mitigation principles are adhered to on these platforms. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate the frequency and adequacy of potential COI disclosure on orthopaedic online video-based educational platforms. We retrospectively reviewed videos from a single, publicly-accessible online peer-to-peer orthopaedic educational video platform (VuMedi) that is used as an educational resource by a large number of orthopaedic trainees across North America. The 25 highest-viewed videos were identified for each of 6 subspecialty areas (hip reconstruction, knee reconstruction, shoulder/elbow, foot and ankle, spine and sports). A standardized case report form was developed based on the COI disclosure guidelines of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS) and the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Two reviewers watched and assessed each video for presentation of any identifiable commercial products or brand names, disclosure of funding source for video, and presenter's potential conflict of interest. Additionally, presenter disclosures were cross-referenced against commercial relationships reported in the AAOS disclosure database to determine adequacy of disclosure. Any discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus wherever possible, or with adjudication by a third reviewer when necessary. Out of 150 reviewed videos, only 37 (25%) included a disclosure statement of any kind. Sixty-nine (46%) videos involved the presentation of a readily identifiable commercial orthopaedic device, implant or brand. Despite this, only 13 of these (19%) included a disclosure of any kind, and only 8 were considered adequate when compared to the presenter's disclosures in the AAOS database. In contrast, 83% of the presenters of the videos included in this study reported one or more commercial relationships in the AAOS disclosure database. Videos of presentations given at conferences and/or academic meetings had significantly greater rates of disclosure as compared to those that were not (41% vs 14%; p=0.004). Similarly, disclosures associated with conference/meeting presentations had significantly greater rates of adequacy (21% vs 7%; p=0.018). Even so, less than half of the educational videos originating from a conference or meeting included a disclosure of any kind, and only about half of these were deemed adequate. No differences were seen in the rate of disclosures between orthopaedic subspecialties (p=0.791). Online orthopaedic educational videos commonly involve presentation of specific, identifiable commercial products and brands, and the large majority of presenters have existing financial relationships with potential for conflict of interest. Despite this, the overall rate of disclosure of potential conflict of interest in these educational videos is low, and many of these disclosures are incomplete or inadequate. Further work is needed to better understand the impact of this low rate of disclosure on orthopaedic education both in-training and in practice

This qualitative study aims to explore and highlight the experiences of trainees in the Orthopaedic Surgical Education Training (SET) program in New Zealand, with a focus on identifying gender-specific biases which may impact professional development. Orthopaedic SET trainees in New Zealand were invited to complete a qualitative, semi-structured questionnaire exploring their experiences in the Orthopaedic SET program. A broad range of topics were covered, addressing culture, belonging, learning styles and role modelling. Recurrent themes were identified using inductive methods. Analysis of questionnaire responses identified several key themes for women in the Orthopaedic SET program, compared to their male counterparts, including (1) role incredulity, (2) confidence vs. competence, (3) adaptation, (4) interdisciplinary relationships and (5) role modelling. Female participants described experiencing gender bias or discrimination by both patients and interdisciplinary colleagues at a higher rate than their male counterparts. The majority of female participants described feeling as competent as their male counterparts at the same SET level, however, identified that they do not typically exhibit the same confidence in their surgical abilities. Whilst similar numbers of female and male participants described experiencing barriers to career progression, female participants described having to adapt both physically and socially to overcome additional gender-specific barriers. Positive influences on training experience included role modelling and supportive relationships amongst trainee groups. This study highlighted gender-specific biases experienced by trainees in the Orthopaedic SET program in New Zealand. Further investigation is warranted to determine how these experiences affect professional development, and how they may be addressed to foster increased gender equity in the surgical profession. This will likely require system-level interventions to create meaningful and sustainable culture change

Aims

We aim to objectively assess the impact of COVID-19 on mean total operative cases for all indicative procedures (as outlined by the Joint Committee on Surgical Training (JCST)) experienced by orthopaedic trainees in the deanery of the Republic of Ireland. Subjective experiences were reported for each trainee using questionnaires.

Professor Mario Mercuri passed away suddenly after a complication of cancer on 7th May 2011 after dedicating his entire life to patients with tumours.

We have developed a list of 281 competencies deemed to be of importance in the training of orthopaedic surgeons. A stratified, randomised selection of non-university orthopaedic surgeons rated each individual item on a scale 1 to 4 of increasing importance. Summary statistics across all respondents were given. The mean scores and sds were computed. Secondary analyses were computed in general orthopaedics, paediatrics, trauma and adult reconstruction. Of the 156 orthopaedic surgeons approached 131 (84%) responded to the questionnaire. They rated 240 of the 281 items greater than 3.0 suggesting that competence in these was necessary by completion of training.

Complex procedures were rated to be less important. The structure, delivery and implementation of the curriculum needs further study. Learning activities are ‘driven’ by the evaluation of competencies and thus competency-based learning may soon be in the forefront of training programmes.