Aims. The principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) are the foundation of modern medical practice. Surgeons are familiar with the commonly used statistical techniques to test hypotheses, summarize findings, and provide answers within a specified range of probability. Based on this knowledge, they are able to critically evaluate research before deciding whether or not to adopt the findings into practice. Recently, there has been an increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze information and derive findings in orthopaedic research. These techniques use a set of statistical tools that are increasingly complex and may be unfamiliar to the orthopaedic surgeon. It is unclear if this shift towards less familiar techniques is widely accepted in the orthopaedic community. This study aimed to provide an exploration of understanding and acceptance of AI use in research among orthopaedic surgeons. Methods. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were carried out on a sample of 12 orthopaedic surgeons. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes. Results. The four intersecting themes identified were: 1) validity in traditional research, 2) confusion around the definition of AI, 3) an inability to validate AI research, and 4) cautious optimism about AI research. Underpinning these themes is the notion of a validity heuristic that is strongly rooted in traditional research teaching and embedded in medical and surgical training. Conclusion. Research involving AI sometimes challenges the accepted traditional evidence-based framework. This can give rise to confusion among orthopaedic surgeons, who may be unable to confidently validate findings. In our study, the impact of this was mediated by cautious optimism based on an ingrained validity heuristic that orthopaedic surgeons develop through their medical training. Adding to this, the integration of AI into everyday life works to reduce suspicion and aid acceptance. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):696–703

Musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries are one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Despite improvements in trauma-related morbidity and mortality in high-income countries over recent years, outcomes following MSK injuries in low and middle-income countries, such as South Africa (SA), have not. Despite governmental recognition that this is required, funding and research into this significant health burden are limited within SA. This study aims to identify research priorities within MSK trauma care using a consensus-based approach amongst MSK health care practitioners within SA. Members from the Orthopaedic Research Collaborative (ORCA), based in SA, collaborated using a two round modified Delphi technique to form a consensus on research priorities within orthopaedic trauma care. Members involved in the process were orthopaedic healthcare practitioners within SA. Participants from the ORCA network, working within SA, scored research priorities across two Delphi rounds from low to high priority. We have published the overall top 10 research priorities for this Delphi process. Questions were focused on two broad groups - clinical effectiveness in trauma care and general trauma public health care. Both groups were represented by the top two priorities, with the highest ranked question regarding the overall impact of trauma in SA and the second regarding the clinical treatment of open fractures. This study has defined research priorities within orthopaedic trauma in South Africa. Our vision is that by establishing consensus on these research priorities, policy and research funding will be directed into these areas. This should ultimately improve musculoskeletal trauma care across South Africa and its significant health and socioeconomic impacts

Aims. The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature. Methods. A bibliometric search of journals’ online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO). Results. Of the 7,201 papers reviewed, 136 included qualitative methods (0.1%). There was no significant difference between the journals, apart from Bone & Joint Open, which included 21 studies using qualitative methods, equalling 4% of its published articles. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that there is a very low number of qualitative research papers published within trauma and orthopaedic journals. Given the increasing focus on patient outcomes and improving the patient experience, it may be argued that there is a requirement to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches to orthopaedic research. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods may effectively address the complex and personal aspects of patients’ care, ensuring that outcomes align with patient values and enhance overall care quality

Aim. A substantial portion of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) literature is comprised of observational studies. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines emphasize the importance of clearly defining variables and providing diagnostic criteria. Well-defined variables in these studies play a crucial role in ensuring data consistency, fostering comparability among studies, and laying a robust foundation for evidence-based decision-making. We aimed to determine the definition of these variables and determine the objectivity of the definitions. Method. We reviewed observational studies on hip or knee PJI that focused on variables and their association with treatment outcomes. The inclusion criteria comprised studies from Jan 2017 to Jan 2023. We focused on 13 variables that were possibly subjective. These were smoking, alcohol use, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, lung disease, rheumatoid arthritis, liver diseases, kidney diseases, cardiovascular diseases, malignancy, immunosuppression, use of antibiotics, and type of infection. The reviewers examined the text of the articles, along with any available online supplements or protocols, for definitions of the selected variables. We classified a definition as objective if there was the presence of time element, severity, staging, frequencies, laboratory cut-off, medication dependence, among others. Chart review was deemed subjective. Results. We included 75 studies in the analysis. The most common factors studied were diabetes mellitus (79%), cardiovascular disease, smoking history, and rheumatoid arthritis (47% each). The variables that were objectively defined most often were antibiotic use (100%) and type of infection (95%). Smoking history (16%) and alcohol use (20%) were the least frequently objectively defined variables. Further analysis revealed that a considerable number of studies incorporated variables into their primary analyses without clear definitions. For instance, out of the 59 studies where diabetes was considered a variable, 41 studies (70%) included diabetes in their main analyses as a factor for PJI treatment outcomes, despite only 34 studies having defined this variable. Moreover, of the 34 provided definitions of diabetes mellitus, only 12 provided objective criteria for diagnosis. The rest of the provided definitions relied on “chart review” without further specification. Table 1 outlines the proportion of studies with variables defined and included in their analysis. Conclusions. Study variables were not clearly defined in most of the observational studies raising concerns about the reproducibility and reliability of findings. Our study underscores the vital need for standardized variable definitions in PJI research. Professional societies may play a crucial role in setting standards for the definition of variables. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction and aims. Robotic Assisted Arthroplasty (RAA) is increasingly proliferative in the international orthopaedic environment. Traditional bibliometric methods poorly assess the impact of surgical innovations such as robotic technology. Progressive Scholarly Acceptance (PSA) is a new model of bibliographic analysis which quantitatively evaluates the impact of robotic technology in the orthopaedic scientific community. Methods. A systematic literature search was conducted to retrieve all peer-reviewed, English language publications studying robotic assisted hip and knee arthroplasty between 1992 and 2017. Review articles were excluded. Articles were classified as either “initial investigations” or “refining studies” according to the PSA model, described by Schnurman and Kondziolka. The PSA end-point is defined as the point in time when the number of studies focussed on refining or improving a novel technique (RAA) outnumbers the number of initial studies assessing its efficacy. Results. The study identified 73 original studies published since 1992 in the field of RAA. The procedures reported were total hip and total knee replacement, and uni-compartmental knee replacement. Publications originated from 17 countries and 117 organisations. Fifty percent of studies identified were published in the last 5 years at an average of 7 publications per year, compared to an average of 2.7 publications per year from 1992 to 2012. Fifty-eight publications (79.4%) were classified as initial investigations and 15 (20.5%) were classified as refining studies. Conclusions. PSA model analysis of RAA is indicative of a significant increase in published research, particularly over the last 5 years. However, the majority of publications are efficacious rather than technique refining. This implies that RAA has not reached the threshold of general acceptance by the Orthopaedic community

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has recently identified musculoskeletal care as a major global health issue in the developing world. However, little is known about the quality and trends of orthopaedic research in resource-poor settings. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of orthopaedic research in low-income countries (LIC). The primary objective was to determine the quality and publication parameters of studies performed in LIC. Secondary objectives sought to provide recommendations for successful strategies to implement research endeavors in LIC. A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching MEDLINE (1966-November 2014), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library to identify peer-reviewed orthopaedic research conducted in LICs. The PRISMA guidelines for performing a systematic review were followed. LIC were defined by the WHO and by the World Bank as countries with gross national income per capita equal or less than 1045US$. Inclusion criteria were (1) studies performed in a LIC, (2) conducted on patients afflicted by an orthopaedic condition, and (3) evaluated either an orthopaedic intervention or outcome. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) were used to objectively rate the overall methodological quality of each study. Additional data collected from these studies included the publication year, journal demographics, orthopaedic subspecialty and authors' country of origin. A total of 1,809 articles were screened and 277 studies met our inclusion criteria. Eighty-eight percent of studies conducted in LIC were of lower quality evidence according to the GRADE score and consisted mostly of small case series or case reports. Bangladesh and Nepal were the only two LIC with national journals and produced the highest level of research evidence. Foreign researchers produced over 70% of the studies with no collaboration with local LIC researchers. The most common subspecialties were trauma (42%) and paediatrics (14%). The 3 most frequent countries where the research originated were the United States (42%), United Kingdom (11%), and Canada (8%). The 3 most common locations where research was conducted were Haiti (18%), Afghanistan (14%), and Malawi (7%). The majority of orthopaedic studies conducted in LIC were of lower quality and performed by foreign researchers with little local collaboration. In order to promote the development of global orthopaedic surgery and research in LIC, we recommend (1) improving the collaboration between researchers in developed and LIC, (2) promoting the teaching of higher-quality and more rigorous research methodology through shared partnerships, (3) improving the capacity of orthopaedic research in developing nations through national peer-reviewed journals, and (4) dedicated subsections in international orthopaedic journals to global healthcare research

Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis is a common entity and increasing in prevalence. Limited evidence is available regarding patient reported outcomes comparing primary vs revision surgery for those undergoing lumbar decompression, with or without fusion. Evidence available suggest a lower rate of improvement in the revision group. The aim of this study was to assess patient reported outcomes in patients undergoing revision decompression, with or without fusion, when compared to primary surgery. Patient data was collected from the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) database. Patients undergoing lumbar decompression without or without fusion were included. Patients under 18, undergoing discectomy, greater than two level decompressions, concomitant cervical or thoracic spine surgery were excluded. Demographic data, smoking status, narcotic use, number of comorbidities as well as individual comorbidities were included in our propensity scores. Patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression were matched in a four:one ratio according to their scores, whilst a separate matched cohort was created for those undergoing primary vs revision decompression and fusion. Continuous data was compared using a two-tailed t-test, whilst categorical variables were assessed using chi-square test. A total of 555 patients were included, with 444 primary patients matched to 111 revision surgery patients, of which 373 (67%) did not have fusion. Patients undergoing primary decompression with fusion compared to revision patients were more likely to answer yes to “feel better after surgery” (87.8% vs 73.8%, p=0.023), “undergo surgery again” (90.1% vs 76.2%, P=0.021) and “improvement in mental health” (47.7% vs 28.6%, p=0.03) at six months. There was no difference in either of these outcomes at 12 or 24 months. There was no difference between the groups ODI, EQ-5D, SF 12 scores at any time point. Patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression alone showed no difference in PROMs at any time point. In a matched cohort, there appears to be no difference in improvement in PROMS between patients undergoing primary vs revision decompression, with or without fusion, at two year follow-up. This would suggest similar outcomes can be obtained in revision cases

The poor reporting and use of statistical methods in orthopaedic papers has been widely discussed by both clinicians and statisticians. A detailed review of research published in general orthopaedic journals was undertaken to assess the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting. A representative sample of 100 papers was assessed for compliance to CONSORT and STROBE guidelines and the quality of the statistical reporting was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Overall compliance with CONSORT and STROBE guidelines in our study was 59% and 58% respectively, with very few papers fulfilling all criteria. In 37% of papers patient numbers were inadequately reported; 20% of papers introduced new statistical methods in the ‘results’ section not previously reported in the ‘methods’ section, and 23% of papers reported no measurement of error with the main outcome measure. Taken together, these issues indicate a general lack of statistical rigour and are consistent with similar reviews undertaken in a number of other scientific and clinical research disciplines. It is imperative that the orthopaedic research community strives to improve the quality of reporting; a failure to do so could seriously limit the development of future research

The inquisitive and skeptical nature of humans drives research. Questions continue to be raised from a basic, applied and clinical perspective related to our areas of interest—be it molecular biology, biomaterials, biomechanics or clinical. The future of research will only be realised by understanding the past and the planning a pathway for the future. Translating advances in the laboratory to the patient are key to improving clinical outcomes. The future holds great promise, as long as we continue to challenge ourselves and ask those fundamental questions of ‘why’ and ‘how’ things happen

Tendinopathy is a debilitating musculoskeletal condition which can cause significant pain and lead to complete rupture of the tendon, which often requires surgical repair. Due in part to the large spectrum of tendon pathologies, these disorders continue to be a clinical challenge. Animal models are often used in this field of research as they offer an attractive framework to examine the cascade of processes that occur throughout both tendon pathology and repair. This review discusses the structural, mechanical, and biological changes that occur throughout tendon pathology in animal models, as well as strategies for the improvement of tendon healing. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:193–202

Most long-term follow-up studies report retrospective data, the quality of which remains limited due to their inherent biases. Prospective databases may overcome these limitations, however, feasibility and costs limit their application. To date there exists a paucity of evidence-based literature on which recommendations can be made for the ideal length of follow-up for spinal deformity research. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate the added value of follow-up of patients beyond 2 years following surgery for AIS. A database registry evaluating surgical outcomes for all consecutive AIS patients with post-op data-points of 6 months, 1 year, 2 year, and 5 year was analysed. Surgeon-reported complications, SRS-22 scores, and radiographic data were evaluated. Complications requiring surgical or medical intervention were compared between patients in whom complications developed within 2 years to those in which newly developed complications occurred between >2–5 years. 536 patients were analysed. SRS-22 scores significantly improved at 2 years post-op with no change at 5-year follow-up. Overall complication rate was 33.2% with majority occurring within 2 years (24.8%). The rate of complications occurring >2–5 years requiring intervention was significantly lower than those requiring intervention within 2 years of surgery (4.7% vs 9.7%, p=0.000), however was not negligible. The most common newly observed complication beyond 2 years was pain (1.9%), followed by surgical site infection (SSI) (1.3%) and implant issues (0.56%). There were no significant differences in the rates of crankshaft (p=0.48), implant issues (p=0.56), pseudarthrosis (p=0.19), and SSI (p=0.13) between the 2 time points. Although majority of complications following AIS surgery occurs within 2 years, a non-negligible rate of newly observed complications occur at >2–5 years post-op. Specifically crankshaft, pseudarthrosis, implant issues, and SSI have similar rates of occurrence at these 2 time points

The aim of this study was to determine the floor and ceiling effects for both the QuickDASH and PRWE following a fracture of the distal radius. Secondary aims were to determine the degree to which patients with a floor or ceiling effect felt that their wrist was ‘normal’, and if there were patient factors associated with achieving a floor or ceiling effect.

A retrospective cohort study of patients sustaining a distal radius fracture and managed at the study centre during a single year was undertaken. Outcome measures included the QuickDASH, the PRWE, EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L), and the normal wrist score.

There were 526 patients with a mean age of 65yrs (20–95) and 421 (77%) were female. Most patients were managed non-operatively (73%, n=385). The mean follow-up was 4.8yrs (4.3–5.5). A ceiling effect was observed for both the QuickDASH (22.3%) and PRWE (28.5%). When defined to be within the minimum clinical important difference of the best available score, the ceiling effect increased to 62.8% for the QuickDASH and 60% for the PRWE. Patients that achieved a ceiling score for the QuickDASH and PRWE subjectively felt their wrist was only 91% and 92% normal, respectively. On logistic regression analysis, a dominant hand injury and better health-related quality of life were the common factors associated with achieving a ceiling score for both the QuickDASH and PRWE (all p<0.05).

The QuickDASH and PRWE demonstrate ceiling effects when used to assess the outcome of fractures of the distal radius. Patients achieving ceiling scores did not consider their wrist to be ‘normal’. Future patient-reported outcome assessment tools for fractures of the distal radius should aim to limit the ceiling effect, especially for individuals or groups that are more likely to achieve a ceiling score.

Introduction. Satisfaction and survival rates after total knee arthroplasty were high according to literatures. However, around 8% of revision surgeries were still noted and almost half of them were early failures, which were most seen in 2 years after primary surgery. This study aimed to find out the factors lead to early failures after total knee arthroplasty. Materials and Methods. Data were collected based on the National Health Insurance Research Data Base of Taiwan from 1996 to 2010. Primary total knee arthroplasty surgeries were included. Revisional total knee arthroplasty, removal of total knee implant and arthrotomy surgeries registered after primary total knee surgeries are seen as failures. Results. 1. Overall prevalence. Total failure rate is 3.67% (4820 in 131441) and 44.46% of them are early failures in two years after primary surgery (2143 in 4820). 2. Characters of patient. Higher early failure rates were found in patients who accepted primary surgery under 56 years old, compared to 56∼64 years old and <65 years old groups (>65years/old compared to <56years/old, HR:0.51 [95% CI 0.44–0.58]; 56–64 years/old compared to <56years old, HR:0.61 [95% CI 0.52–0.72]). Male patients were found to have higher early failure rates compared to female group (compared to female, HR:1.55, [95% CI 1.41–1.69]). 3. Character of disease. Diagnosis of Osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis would have no difference in failure rates, but gouty arthritis and other reasons would lead to higher early failure rates (compared to osteoarthritis, HR:1.94, [95% CI 1.55- 2.42]). 4. Influences of comorbidity. Diabetes Mellitus would lead to higher early failure rate (compared to non-DM, HR:1.28, [95% CI 1.13–1.46]). No significant differences were found in Renal disease and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index. 5. Character of Health Care Provider. 41.50% surgeries were performed in Medical Centers(>500 beds), 27.20% in Metropolitan Hospitals(>250 beds) and 31.20% in Local Community Hospitals(>20 beds). Surgeries performed in Metropolitan and Local Community Hospitals would have higher early failure rates (Local compared to center H, HR:1.42 [95% CI 1.28 −1.57]; Metropolitan compared to center H, HR:1.23 [95% CI 1.11 −1.37]). 83.40% surgeries were performed by high volume surgeons. High volume surgeons would have lower early failure rates (compared to low volume, HR:0.62, [95% CI 0.52–0.75]). 87.20% surgeries were performed in high volume hospitals. High volume hospitals would have lower early failure rates (compared to low volume, HR:0.51, [95% CI 0.41- 0.63]). Conclusion and Discussion. Early failure rate (<2 years after primary surgery) in Taiwan is compatible to global data. Younger patients accepted total knee arthroplasty would have more failures, which might be a result of higher activity demand. Reasons other than osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis such as gouty arthritis, hemophilia, post-traumatic arthritis and osteonecrosis can complicate the surgery and lead to higher failure rates. Patients with diabetes mellitus would have more infection risks and therefore lead to higher failures. High volume surgeons, high volume hospitals and even non-local hospitals could provide better trainings and facilities to patients, which can therefore lead to lower failures

Prolonged length of stay (LOS) is a significant contributor to the variation in surgical health care costs and resource utilization after elective spine surgery. The primary goal of this study was to identify patient, surgical and institutional variables that influence LOS. The secondary objective is to examine variability in institutional practices among participating centers.

This is a retrospective study of a prospectively multicentric followed cohort of patients enrolled in the CSORN between January 2015 and October 2020. A logistic regression model and bootstrapping method was used. A survey was sent to participating centers to assessed institutional level interventions in place to decrease LOS. Centers with LOS shorter than the median were compared to centers with LOS longer than the median.

A total of 3734 patients were included (979 discectomies, 1102 laminectomies, 1653 fusions). The median LOS for discectomy, laminectomy and fusion were respectively 0.0 day (IQR 1.0), 1.0 day (IQR 2.0) and 4.0 days (IQR 2.0). Laminectomy group had the largest variability (SD=4.4, Range 0-133 days). For discectomy, predictors of LOS longer than 0 days were having less leg pain, higher ODI, symptoms duration over 2 years, open procedure, and AE (p< 0.05). Predictors of longer LOS than median of 1 day for laminectomy were increasing age, living alone, higher ODI, open procedures, longer operative time, and AEs (p< 0.05). For posterior instrumented fusion, predictors of longer LOS than median of 4 days were older age, living alone, more comorbidities, less back pain, higher ODI, using narcotics, longer operative time, open procedures, and AEs (p< 0.05). Ten centers (53%) had either ERAS or a standardized protocol aimed at reducing LOS.

In this study stratifying individual patient and institutional level factors across Canada, several independent predictors were identified to enhance the understanding of LOS variability in common elective lumbar spine surgery. The current study provides an updated detailed analysis of the ongoing Canadian efforts in the implementation of multimodal ERAS care pathways. Future studies should explore multivariate analysis in institutional factors and the influence of preoperative patient education on LOS.

There is a paucity of published Canadian literature comparing lumbar total disc arthroplasty (LDA) to fusion on patient outcomes in degenerative spondylosis. The purpose of this study is to quantify and compare the long-term patient reported outcomes following LDA and matched-fusion procedures.

We conducted a matched-cohort study comparing consecutive patients enrolled by CSORN who underwent standalone primary LDA or hybrid techniques for degenerative disk disease between 2015–2019. Fusion patients were included by a primary diagnosis of degenerative disk disease, chief complaint of back pain, who received a primary fusion irrespective of technique. Fusion patients were matched by number of involved levels of surgery to LDA counterparts. Outcome scores and patient satisfaction were assessed preoperatively and 2-years postoperatively.

97 patients (39-female, 58-male) underwent LDA or hybrid construct up to 4 levels. 94 patients (52-female, 42-male) underwent a lumbar fusion were selected based on inclusion criteria. 36 LDA and 57 Fusion patients underwent a 1-level surgery. 39 LDA and 25 Fusion patients underwent 2-level surgery. 18 LDA and 7 Fusion patients underwent 3-level surgery. 4 LDA and 5 Fusion patients underwent a 4-level procedure. Slight differences in average cohort age were found (LDA-43.4yrs, Fusion-49.8yrs, p<0.01). Cohort preoperative-BMI (LDA-27.0kg/m², Fusion-27.9kg/m², p=0.29) and total comorbidities (LDA-2.6, Fusion-2.1, p=0.05) demonstrated no clinically significant differences. At 2 year follow-up, no differences were found in ODI improvement (LDA-20.32pts, Fusion-17.02pts, p=0.36), numerical back-pain improvement (LDA-3.5pts, Fusion-3.06pts, p=0.40), numerical leg-pain improvement (LDA-1.67pts, Fusion-1.87pts, p=0.76), and Health Scale improvement (LDA-17.12, Fusion-10.73, p=0.20) between cohorts. Similar positive findings were found in subgroups stratified by number of surgical levels. Satisfaction rate at 2 years was 86.7% and 82.4% for LDA and Fusion patients respectively.

There didn't appear to be significant differences in outcomes or satisfaction through 2 years comparing patients who underwent LDA (whether used in isolation or as part of a hybrid construct) for debilitating degenerative disk disease and isolated spinal fusion for back dominant pain.

Aim. Research projects are a compulsory part of the postgraduate curriculum in most Academic Departments. To not only fulfil study requirements, but to ensure noteworthy and accurate results meticulous and reliable data collection is necessary. Our aim was to better understand what preferences health care professionals have in undertaking data collection. Methods. We did a choice based conjoint analysis with an online data collection survey. This study type allows the evaluation of the relative importance of component attributes. We used 4 major criteria to evaluate preferences when performing data collection. These were: 1. Time to complete the form, 2. Remuneration and recognition, 3. Study design and 4. Responsibilities at the time of collection. We sent electronic questionnaires to doctors in the Orthopaedic, Ophthalmology and Plastic Surgery Departments at a Johannesburg Academic Institution. Results. We received 68 responses. In general the most the most alluring trait to a data collection form is Tick Box Answer format. This is followed by the need to be recognized as a co-author on publication and the completion of forms in a time other than during work. The amount of time it takes is the least important. Recognition as a co-author of a study was more important than financial remuneration. The major difference between the 34 Orthopaedic respondents and the rest was that they were less likely to complete forms in their spare time and are less concerned with the time taken. Regressional analysis shows that data collection design must be tailored to specific groups as there are preference differences. NO DISCLOSURES

The role of dual consultant operating (DCO) in general orthopaedics has not been researched; where it has shown benefit in other specialties, there is a lack of information on how DCO affects the surgeons themselves. We wanted to explore the potential effects of DCO on stress, as a foundation for further research to guide support for our surgeons. We conducted a survey among orthopaedic consultants around New Zealand, containing questions pertaining to the demographics of respondents, their experience with DCO, what the expected risks and benefits of DCO would be, and provided two high-stress exemplar clinical scenarios where respondents were asked to rate their expected stress level at baseline, with a more junior consultant present, and with a more senior consultant present. We found 99% of respondents had been involved in DCO at some point in their careers, yet only 38% were involved in DCO on at least a monthly basis. Perceived benefits greatly outweighed potential risks: 95% felt DCO would decrease their stress, 91% felt it improved intraoperative decision making, and 89% felt it provided more enjoyment at work and enhanced collegiality. A decrease in perceived stress was seen from baseline with a more junior consultant available and a greater decrease in stress seen with a more senior consultant, particularly in a complex elective setting. All respondents felt there is benefit in DCO and the vast majority feel it has positive effects on stress levels. In a time where burnout is more prevalent, using tools such as DCO could be an effective way to decrease stress, enhance enjoyment and collegiality — challenging some key contributors to burnout — and support mentorship with further skill acquisition. This research provides a good base to pursue further qualitative and quantitative research into the area, with a view to addressing barriers to provision of regular DCO

Escalating health care expenditure worldwide is driving the need for effective resource decision-making, with medical practitioners increasingly making complex resource decisions within the context of patient care. Despite raising serious legal and ethical issues in practice, this has attracted little attention in Australia, or internationally. In particular, it is unknown how orthopaedic surgeons perceive their obligations to the individual patient, and the wider community, when rationing care, and how they reconcile competing obligations. This research explores legal and ethical considerations, and resource allocation by Australian orthopaedic surgeons, as a means of achieving public health cost containment driven by macro-level policy and funding decisions. This research found that Australian orthopaedic surgeon's perceptions, and resource allocation decision making, can be explained by understanding how principles of distributive justice challenge, and shift, the traditional medical paradigm. It found that distributive justice, and challenges of macro level health policy and funding decisions, have given rise to two new medical paradigms. Each which try to balance the best interests of individual patients with demands in respect of the sustainability of the health system, in a situation where resources may be constrained. This research shows that while bedside rationing has positioned the medical profession as the gate keepers of resources, it may have left them straddling an increasingly irreconcilable void between the interests of the individual patient and the wider community, with the sustainability of the health system hanging in the balance

The Disability of Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score questionnaire is a common self-administered tool to assess symptom severity and function in patients with injuries or pathology of the upper limb. However, having such a pertinent tool only in English is limiting in multi-cultural and multilingual populations where English is not always the first language, such as our South African context. IsiZulu is the most widely spoken language in South Africa (approximately 25% of the population). There are certain instances in research, particularly in international studies, where non-English speaking individuals need to be excluded based on translator reliability. This puts our institutions at a disadvantage by not being able to contribute to research. As per the international Institute of Work and Health (IWH), we followed the 5 stage guidelines to achieve the most appropriate linguistic and cultural adapted translation for our setting. (1) Two independent translations from English to isiZulu. (2) A synthesis of the 2 initial translations. (3) Two independent back-translations from the synthesized isiZulu version into English. (4) Expert panel (consisting of university lecturers and official translators) to review all versions and re-create an optimized synthesized version. (5) Pre-testing of the final optimized synthesized version in a pilot study. This rigorous process allowed for a concise and more culturally relevant translation for use in our population. The fourth stage in the process was integral in synthesizing the tool while considering the colloquial and semantic differences and resolving them with appropriate equivalents. The IWH guidelines aids in the cross-cultural adaptation of the DASH score while remaining valid and comparable to the original English version. This is beneficial in multi-national research projects and allows for the standardization of health outcome measures

Low-energy fractures complications are a major public health issue that make osteoporosis even worse. In sub-Saharan Africa, the prevalence of osteoporosis varies from 18.2% to 65.8%. There was no change in bone mineral density between HIV-infected and non-HIV-infected women in Sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV is widespread. Other investigations that demonstrated that HIV-infected people had poor BMD both before and after starting anti-retroviral treatment did not consistently show a low BMD finding. Inflammation-mediated bone remodelling has been associated with low BMD in HIV-infected patients. Antiretroviral Therapy has been demonstrated to exacerbate bone loss in addition to the pre-existing intrinsic risk of developing osteoporosis. Question: Is there loss of bone in HIV-infected patients before initiating ART?. The patients who were HIV-positive and enrolled in the ADVANCE research were retrospectively reviewed on a desk. All of the 1053 individuals in the ADVANCE research had a DXA scan performed to evaluate BMD as part of the initial screening and recruitment approach. The ADVANCE research enrolled HIV-positive people and randomly assigned them to three ART arms. A total of 400 patients were reviewed. Of these 400 records reviewed, 62.3% were female. 80% of the participants were younger than 40 years old, and 3% were older than 50 years. 82% were virally suppressed with less than 50 viral copies. The prevalence of osteopenia was 25.5% and osteoporosis was 2.8%, observed in predominantly African female participants aged between 30 and 39 years. The findings of this study confirm that there is pre-existing bone loss among HIV-infected ART naïve individuals. Approximately 28.3% in our study had clinically confirmed evidence of bone loss and of these, 2.8% of the entire cohort had osteoporosis. Bone loss was most prevalent in black females who are virologically suppressed