The attitudes of orthopaedic surgeons regarding radiology reporting is not well-described in the literature. We surveyed Orthopaedic Surgeons in Australia and New Zealand to assess if they routinely review formal radiology reports. An anonymized, 14 question online survey was distributed to consultant surgeons of the Australian and New Zealand Orthopaedic Associations (AOA, NZOA). Two hundred respondents completed the survey (Total number of Fellows: 283 NZOA, 1185 AOA). 18.5% of respondents always reviewed the formal Radiology report, 44.5% most of the time, 35% sometimes and 2% never. By imaging modality, MRI reports were the most frequently reviewed (92%), followed by ultrasound (74%) and nuclear medicine (63%). Only 10% of surgeons consulted formal reports for plain radiography. 55% of surgeons were still likely to disagree with the MRI report, followed by 46% for plain radiography. In cases of disagreement, only 21% of surgeons would always contact the reporting radiologist. The majority of Surgeons (85.5%) think there should be more collaboration between the disciplines, although only 50.5% had regular attendance of a Radiologist at their departmental audit. This survey reveals that the majority of orthopaedic surgeons are not routinely reading radiology reports. This points towards a need for further interdisciplinary collaboration. To our knowledge, this is the first survey directly assessing attitudes of orthopaedic surgeons towards radiology reports

The 2020-2021 Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS) match year was altered on an unprecedented scale. Visiting electives were cancelled at a national level, and the CaRMS interview tour was moved to a virtual model. These changes posed a significant challenge to both prospective students and program directors (PDs), requiring each party to employ alternative strategies to distinguish themselves throughout the match process. For a variety of reasons, including a decline in applicant interest secondary to reduced job prospects, the field of orthopaedic surgery was identified as vulnerable to many of these changes, creating a window of opportunity to evaluate their impacts on students and recruiting residency programs. This longitudinal survey study was disseminated to match-year medical students (3rd and 4th year) with an interest in orthopaedic surgery, as well as orthopaedic surgery program directors. Responses to the survey were collected using an electronic form designed in Qualtrics (Qualtrics, 2021, Provo, Utah, USA). Students were contacted through social media posts, as well as by snowball sampling methods through appropriate medical student leadership intermediates. The survey was disseminated to all 17 orthopedic surgery program directors in Canada. A pre-match and post-match iteration of this survey were designed to identify whether expectations differed from reality regarding the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the CaRMS match 2020-2021 process. A similar package was disseminated to Canadian orthopaedic surgery program directors pre-match, with an option to opt-in for a post-match survey follow-up. This survey had a focus on program directors’ opinions of various novel communication, recruitment, and assessment strategies, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Students’ responses to the loss of visiting electives were negative. Despite a reduction in financial stress associated with reduced need to travel (p=0.001), this was identified as a core component of the clerkship experience. In the case of virtual interviews, students’ initial trepidation pre-CaRMS turned into a positive outlook post-CaRMS (significant improvement, p=0.009) indicating an overall satisfaction with the virtual interview format, despite some concerns about a reduction in their capacity to network. Program directors and selection committee faculty also felt positively about the virtual interview format. Both students and program directors were overwhelmingly positive about virtual events put on by both school programs and student-led initiatives to complement the CaRMS tour. CaRMS was initially developed to facilitate the matching process for both students and programs alike. We hope to continue this tradition of student-led and student-informed change by providing three evidence-based recommendations. First, visiting electives should not be discontinued in future iterations of CaRMS if at all possible. Second, virtual interviews should be considered as an alternative approach to the CaRMS interview tour moving forward. And third, ongoing virtual events should be associated with a centralized platform from which programs can easily communicate virtual sessions to their target audience

Physician health is a global concern, with increasing research efforts directed towards the challenge. Australia has limited published specialty-specific well-being data for trainees and consultants in medicine and surgery. We measured distress in Australian Orthopaedic trainees using the Physician Well-Being Index (PWBI, MedEd Web Solutions) using an online anonymous survey sent by the Australian Orthopaedic Association. The survey response rate was 38% (88/230). Forty-four percent of survey respondents met criteria for distress. Self-reported burnout in the 30 days prior was reported by 63% of respondents. Fifty-eight percent of females and 41% of males met criteria for distress. Of the 19% or respondents identifying as an ethnic minority, 53% were distressed compared to 42% of those identifying as non-ethnic minority. Trainees without a mentor had a 50% distress rate compared to those with a mentor (37% distress rate). Twenty-five percent of all trainees wished they had picked a career outside of medicine and 16% wished they had pursued a medical career other than Orthopaedic Surgery. Of those trainees who had already passed the fellowship exam, 17% wished they had pursued a career outside of medicine and 21% wished they had pursued a medical career in an area other than Orthopaedic Surgery. These findings suggest concerning rates of career regret and gender-related trends in distress in Australian Orthopaedic trainees. Females may be over-represented in our results as 17% of the source population was female compared to 22% of respondents. Further research is required across all Australian specialties to gain further understanding of factors contributing to distress and to assist in the development of strategy to protect against physician burnout

Introduction. Despite the established guidelines on lower extremity free flap reconstruction by the British Orthopaedic Association Standard for Trauma (BOAST-4) the post-operative care has yet to be standardised. There is currently no coherent evidence in the literature regarding clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression; the optimal regimes and their respective physiological benefits. The aim of this study is to survey all UK Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) with regards to the post-operative care of lower extremity free flaps and elucidate the current protocols for clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. Materials & Methods. All UK-based adult MTCs were surveyed. We formulated a detailed questionnaire to enquire about the post-operative care of lower extremity free flap reconstructions; the number of free flap reconstructions per month and take backs per month and for which post-operative methods a protocol is used in each MTC. We asked specific questions concerning: clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. This questionnaire was distributed to consultant leads in the form of multiple choice questions, with an option of free-text box for further comments, using JISC online surveys. Results were analysed in Excel and presented in percentages. Results. The 28 adult MTCs were contacted. The results showed a lack of formal regional protocols with great variability, suggesting there is no general consensus on post-operative care of lower extremity free flap reconstructions with regards to clinical monitoring, warming, dangling and compression. Conclusions. This survey of UK MTCs on the post-operative protocols for lower extremity free flap reconstruction demonstrated lack of evidence, consensus and large variability in common practice which requires standardisation

Aim. Suppressive antimicrobial therapy (SAT) is used worldwide for patients with a prosthetic joint infection (PJI but clear definitions or guidelines regarding the indications, antimicrobial strategy or treatment duration are currently lacking in the literature. The aim of this study was to identify the global differences in the clinical practice of SAT for PJI. Method. An online survey was designed to investigate the current opinion on indication and treatment goals, preferred antimicrobial drugs, dosing and treatment duration and follow-up of patients with PJI on suppression. The survey was distributed using e-mail lists of several international bone and joint infection societies and study groups. Recipients were asked to share the survey with colleagues who were not a member of one of the societies but who were involved in PJI care. Results. The questionnaire was fully completed by 330 physicians from 43 different countries on six continents (Europe, n=134, 41%; Oceania n=112, 34%; North America, n=51, 16%; other, n=33, 10%; total response rate 14%). Antimicrobial treatment for PJI was discussed in a multidisciplinary team in Europe (90%), Oceania (42%) and North America (12%). In six of eight (75%) different clinical scenarios, respondents from North America would most often place a patient on SAT. In seven of eight (88%) scenarios, SAT was started least often by European respondents. The presence of a fistula was considered a contra-indication for suppression by 74 respondents (22%). First choices of SAT for staphylococcal PJI were: oral cephalosporins (39%) and tetracyclines (31%) in North America; anti-staphylococcal penicillins (55%) and oral cephalosporins (24%) in Oceania; tetracyclines (27%) and anti-staphylococcal penicillins (22%) in Europe. For streptococcal PJI, most clinicians preferred penicillins (91% in Oceania, 67% in Europe, and 53% in North America). Preferred SAT for gram negative PJI was: fluoroquinolones and a penicillin/betalactamase inhibitor in North America (26% and 18%, respectively) and Oceania (23% and 27%, respectively); fluoroquinolones (31%) and Cotrimoxazole (28%) in Europe. The dosage of SAT was never lowered (n=126, 38%), standardly lowered for all antibiotics (n=79, 24%) or only lowered for specific antibiotics (n=125, 38%). SAT was prescribed for an indefinite duration (n=43, 13%), as fixed duration between six months and three years (n=104, 32%) or for an undetermined prespecified duration (n=154, 47%). Conclusions. Substantial variation in the practice of SAT for PJI exists between physicians worldwide and throughout the different continents. This reflects the paucity of data regarding the indication and treatment of PJI with SAT

A retrospective follow-up study was done, assessing regional practices in acute cervical reduction in hospitals in the Western Cape. The constitutional court ruled on the urgency in managing cervical dislocations, and our task is to ensure that medical treatment is optimized to comply with best medical practice and the apex court. A questionnaire was distributed and completed by emergency departments at each hospital, the results retrieved, analysed, and compared to a similar survey done in 2016. Protocols for managing cervical spine dislocations had improved from 80% having no protocols to only over half of facilities (52,6%) not having protocols in place. Inadequate equipment availability remained a problem with only 50% of facilities having adequate equipment available in 2016 to 43,6% in 2023. 10,3% of participants did not know if there was equipment available. In terms of knowledge, there remained poor formal training with a drop from 93% participants identifying that the main indication to attempt emergency cervical reduction was acute cervical dislocation with worsening neurology, to only 46,2%. However, there was an increase in the number of participants who thought reduction was safe. The same percentage of participants from 2016 to 2023 would attempt emergency cervical reduction if given adequate training. Previously we found that most Western Cape hospitals had inadequate protocols, training, and equipment for cervical reductions. In 2023, more hospitals in the Province have protocols in place for cervical reductions and the same percentage of doctors would attempt emergency cervical reduction with adequate training. However, equipment and training for management of acute cervical dislocations has not improved. We conclude that most Western Cape Hospitals are unprepared to adequately manage acute cervical dislocations

Aim. Pelvic osteomyelitis following pressure ulceration results in substantial patient morbidity. Previous studies have reported a heterogenous approach to diagnosis and medical management by physicians, suggesting equipoise on key clinical questions. This study hypothesised that the same equipoise exists amongst Orthopaedic surgeons. Method. An 18-question multiple-choice questionnaire was designed through an iterative feedback process until the final version was agreed by all authors. Likert-type scale responses were used with graded responses (e.g., never/fewer than half of patients/around half of patients/more than half of patients/every patient). The online survey was sent to members of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and the ESCMID Study Group for Implant-Associated Infections (ESGIAI). No incentive for participation was provided. Results. Amongst respondents, 22/41 were based in Europe and 10/41 from the USA. The majority (29/41) had been in clinical practice between 5—24 years. There was a high priority placed on bone biopsy histology, culture-positive bone sampling, and palpable bone without periosteal covering for diagnosis. Multidisciplinary team approach with plastic surgery involvement at the index procedure was advocated. The strongest indications for surgical intervention were source control for sepsis, presence of an abscess/collection, and prevention of local osteomyelitis progression. Physiological/psychological optimisation and control of acute infection were the primary determinants of surgical timing. There was low utilisation of adjunctive surgical therapies. Local/regional primary tissue transfer or secondary healing with/without VAC were the preferred techniques for wound closure. Recurrent osteomyelitis was the most common reason for prolonged antimicrobial therapy. The majority received bedside advice from an infectious disease-specialist but a quarter of respondents preferred telephone advice. Conclusions. Amongst an international cohort of Orthopaedic Surgeons there was a heterogenous diagnostic and therapeutic approach to pressure-related pelvic osteomyelitis

Aim. Deep infection following endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) of long bones is a devastating complication occurring in 15% of musculoskeletal tumour patients. The recently published PARITY Trial demonstrated that extending antibiotic prophylaxis from 24 hours to 5 days does not reduce infection rates. However, questions remain about the optimal antibiotic choice and dose. Method. A 23-question multiple-choice questionnaire was designed and piloted through an iterative feedback process until the final version was agreed by all authors. Open and closed-ended questions were used to gather information on practice and Likert-type scale responses were used to grade responses to ascertain surgeon perceptions and preferences. The online survey was sent to all surgeon delegates of the 34th Annual Meeting of the European Musculo-Skeletal Oncology Society in London in October 2022. Results. Amongst 61 respondents, 43 were based in Europe and 18 outside of Europe. The majority (48/61) had been in clinical practice over 11 years. Antibiotic choice. 1st or 2nd generation cephalosporins were the first line choice practiced among 49 (80.3%) of respondents. Of these, 39 responded had a 2nd line protocol for beta-lactam allergy which was most commonly clindamycin (18), vancomycin (11) or a combination of a glycopeptide or clindamycin plus gentamicin (4). Respondents changed their first line regimen for radiotherapy in 6/61, chemotherapy in 8/61 and tumour site in 20/61. Re-dosing. Intraoperative re-dosing intervals of 1st and 2nd generation cephalosporins ranged from 2 to 8 hourly. Re-dosing for blood loss ranged from never to when 2 litres was lost. Of the 47 respondents, 24 said intraoperative re-dosing is always reliably administered. Duration. Six (10%) of 61 respondent routinely cover the intraoperative period only, whereas 30 (49%) give 24 hours, 16 (give 48 hours or longer and 8 continue until surgical drains are removed. 31 of 61 change duration depending on clinical situation. The most common reasons for changing were patient risk factors, soft tissue status and previous radiotherapy. 57/61 surgeons were aware of the PARITY Trial. When these respondents were asked whether they had changed practice based on PARITY, 12 said yes, 24 said no and 21 said they always give 24 hours anyway. Conclusions. Amongst an international cohort of orthopaedic oncology surgeons there was a wide variation in practice. Further research should focus on the optimum choice and re-dosing strategy, which have not been defined

Tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a subject of considerable debate. A recent study questioned the need for tourniquets based on associated risks. However, the study omitted analysis of crucial tourniquet-related parameters which have been demonstrated in numerous studies to be associated with safe tourniquet use and reduction of adverse events. The current utilization and preferences of tourniquet use in Canada remain unknown. Our primary aim was to determine the current practices, patterns of use, and opinions of tourniquet use in TKA among members of the Canadian Arthroplasty Society (CAS). Additionally, we sought to determine the need for updated best practice guidelines to inform optimal tourniquet use and to identify areas requiring further research. A self-administered survey was emailed to members of the CAS in October 2021(six-week period). The response rate was 57% (91/161). Skip logic branching was used to administer a maximum of 59 questions related to tourniquet use, beliefs, and practices. All respondents were staff surgeons and 88% were arthroplasty fellowship trained. Sixty-five percent have been in practice for ≥11 years and only 16% for 50 TKA/year, 59% have an academic practice, and >67% prefer cemented TKA. Sixty-six percent currently use tourniquets, 25% no longer do but previously did, and 9% never used tourniquets. For those not using tourniquets, the most common reasons are potential harm/risks and publications/conferences. Among current users, 48% use in all cases and an additional 37% use in 76-99% of cases. The top reason for use was improved visualization/bloodless field (88%), followed by performing a cemented TKA, used in training, and faster operative times. The main patient factor influencing selective tourniquet use was peripheral vascular disease and main surgical factors were operative duration and cementless TKA. The most frequent adverse events reported were bruising/pinching under the tourniquet and short-term pain, which majority believed were related to improper tourniquet use (prolonged time, high-pressures, poor cuff fit), yet only 8% use contoured tourniquets and 32% don't use limb protection. Despite substantial evidence in literature that tourniquet safety and probability of harm are affected by tourniquet time and pressure, only 83% and 72% of respondents believe reducing tourniquet time and pressure respectively reduce the probability of harm. In addition, no surgeon utilizes personalized limb occlusion pressure which has been demonstrated to substantially reduce tourniquet pressure while being safe and effective. Furthermore, 62% always use fixed pressure and 37% will modify the pressure based on patient parameters, most often systolic blood pressure and limb size. Almost all (88%) were interested in new evidence-based guidelines regarding these parameters. Tourniquet use in TKA remains prevalent among arthroplasty surgeons in the CAS; however tremendous practice variability regarding several key parameters required for optimal use exists. Current best practices of tourniquet use regarding personalized pressures, time, and type are not being utilized across Canada. There is considerable interest and need for further research and updated guidelines regarding key parameters of safe tourniquet usage to optimize tourniquet use in TKA

INTRODUCTION. 3D preoperative planning software for anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA and RTSA) provides additional insight for surgeons regarding implant selection and placement. Interestingly, the advent of such software has brought previously unconsidered questions to light on the optimal way to plan a case. In this study, a survey of shoulder specialists from the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) was conducted to examine thought patterns in current glenoid implant selection and placement. METHODS. 172 ASES members completed an 18-question survey on their thought process for how they select and place a glenoid implant for both ATSA and RTSA procedures. Data was collected using a custom online Survey Monkey survey. Surgeon answers were split into three cohorts based on their responses to usage of 3D preoperative planning software: high users, seldom users, and non-users. Data was analyzed for each cohort to examine differences in thought patterns, implant selection, and implant placement. RESULTS. 76 surgeons were grouped into the high user cohort, 66 into the seldom user cohort, and 30 into the non-user cohort. 61.9% of high users and 74.1% of seldom users performed >75 shoulder arthroplasties per year, whereas only 19.9% of non-users performed >75 arthroplasties per year (Figure 1). When questioned on glenoid implant type selection (augmented vs. non-augmented components), 80.3% of high users reported augment usage for both ATSA and RTSA, with using augments >45% of the time in 18.4% of ATSA cases and in 22.3% of RTSA cases. For seldom users, 80.3% reported augment usage in ATSA cases, and 70.3% in RTSA cases. Seldom users reported augment usage >45% of the time in 4.5% of ATSA cases and in 1.6% of RTSA cases. For non-preoperative planning users, 53.3% reported using augments in ATSA cases, and 48.3% for RTSA cases. Non-users used augmented glenoid components >45% of the time in 6.6% of ATSA cases and in 6.8% of RTSA cases. For resultant implant superior inclination in RTSA, 40.8% of high users aim for 0° of inclination, followed by 31.8% for seldom users and 16.7% of non-users (Figure 2). CONCLUSION. The results of this study show that 3D preoperative planning software has an influence on the decision making process when planning a shoulder arthroplasty. High volume shoulder arthroplasty surgeons report higher preoperative planning software usage than low volume surgeons, suggesting the utility of such software. Augmented glenoid component usage for both ATSA and RTSA is also higher for surgeons that use preoperative planning software, which either suggests the utility of augmented glenoid components, or that the use of such software creates the perceived need for augmented glenoid components. Lastly, surgeons who preoperatively plan tend to orient their glenoid components differently, which could suggest either a better understanding of the anatomy through the use of the software, or an influence on mindset regarding implant orientation resulting from software usage. This highlights an area for future work that could correlate clinical outcome data to implant selection and placement to prove what is the optimal plan for a given patient. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

INTRODUCTION. 3D preoperative planning software for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) provides surgeons with increased ability to visualize complex joint relationships and deformities. Interestingly, the advent of such software has seemed to create less of a consensus on the optimal way to plan an ATSA rather than more. In this study, a survey of shoulder specialists from the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) was conducted to examine thought patterns in current ATSA implant selection and placement. METHODS. 172 ASES members completed an 18-question survey on their thought process for how they select and place an ATSA glenoid implant. Data was collected using a custom online Survey Monkey survey. Surgeon answers were split into two cohorts based on number of arthroplasties performed per year: between 0–75 was considered low volume (LV), and between 75–200+ was considered high volume (HV). Data was analyzed for each cohort to examine differences in thought patterns, implant selection, and implant placement. RESULTS. 70 surgeons were grouped into the LV cohort, and 102 surgeons were grouped into the HV cohort. 46.1% of surgeons in the HV cohort reported using a preoperative planning software for the majority of cases vs. 41.4% in the LV cohort, 48% of surgeons in the HV cohort reported seldom use vs. 24.3% in the LV cohort, and 5.9% of surgeons in the HV cohort reported no use vs. 34.3% in the LV cohort (Figure 1). When questioned on what percentage of ATSA cases do surgeons use augmented glenoid implants, 20.6% in the HV cohort responded never using augments vs. 30% in the LV cohort, 39.2% responded using augments <15% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 34.3% in the LV cohort, 26.5% responded using augments between 15–45% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 28.6% in the LV cohort, and 13.7% responded using augments >45% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 7.2% in the LV cohort (Figure 2). When asked what the maximum allowable residual retroversion for an ATSA glenoid implant is, surgeons answered 0–5° 6.9% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 4.3% in the LV cohort, 6–9° 35.6% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 50% in the LV cohort, 10–12° 34.7% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 32.9% in the LV cohort, 13–15° 10.9% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 8.6% in the LV cohort, and lastly >16° 11.9% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 4.3% in the LV cohort (Figure 3). CONCLUSION. Research suggests ATSA glenoid implants may be less forgiving of malalignment than reverse shoulder glenoid implants, but the contrasting survey results in this study reveal that a consensus in optimal placement has yet to be reached. Interestingly, even though HV use more augmented glenoid components than LV surgeons, HV surgeons are more accepting of residual glenoid component retroversion than LV surgeons. Despite these differences, there is no way to prove the optimal implant selection and placement without long-term clinical outcomes. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

The purpose of this project was to evaluate North American trauma surgeon preferences regarding patient positioning for antegrade fixation of mid shaft femoral shaft fractures. This project was a cross sectional survey taken of orthopaedic fellows and staff surgeons, belonging to three organizations across North America. An estimated sample size was calculated a priori, while various online techniques were utilized to reduce non responder and fatigue bias. The survey was distributed multiple times to optimize yield. Two hundred twelve (212) participants responded in full, 134 (56%) of whom practiced in Canada. The majority of surgeons worked in level one trauma centres (74%), while 72% treated more than one femoral shaft fracture per week. The most common patient position for mid shaft fixation amongst all surgeons was lateral positioning with manual traction (68%), however community surgeons were significantly more likely to use a fracture table. The most common difficulties faced with using a fracture table were inability to achieve fracture reduction and peroneal nerve palsies. The majority (64%) of surgeons quoted a complication rate with fracture tables of greater than 1 per 100 cases. Lateral position with use of manual traction is the preferred set up for antegrade fixation of femoral shaft fracture in this large North American cohort of trauma surgeons. However, a large subset of community and non academic surgeons still prefer use of the fracture table. Amongst all respondents, a high rate of fracture table complications, including malreduction, were quoted. To date, there is no prospective data comparing these two options for patient positioning, and a randomized controlled trial may be an appropriate next step

Brazilian jiu-jitsu (BJJ) is a grappling-based martial art which can lead to injuries both in training and in competitions. There is a paucity of data regarding injuries sustained while training in Brazilian jiu-jitsu both in competitive and non-competitive jiu-jitsu athletes. Our primary objective was to determine the prevalence of injuries sustained during jiu-jitsu training and competition. Our secondary objectives were to describe the types of injuries, and to determine which participant and injury characteristics are associated with desire to discontinue jiu-jitsu following injury, and characteristics are associated with requiring surgery for an injury. We conducted a survey of all BJJ participants at one club in Hamilton Ontario. We developed a questionnaire using focus groups, key informants and the previous literature. The questionnaire included questions on demographics, injuries in competition and/or training, treatment received, and whether the participant considered discontinuing BJJ following injury. The primary analysis was descriptive. The secondary analysis consisted of unadjusted logistic regression analyses to evaluate the association between selected demographic and injury patterns and those who considered quitting jiu-jitsu as a result of their injuries as a dependent variable. Seventy BJJ athletes participated in this study (response rate 85%). The majority of respondents were male (90%), over the age of 30 years (58.6%), and junior trainees (white belts [37.2%] or blue belts [42.9%]). Ninety one percent of participants were injured in training and 60% of competitive athletes were injured in competitions. Significantly more injuries were sustained overall (p < 0 .001) for each body region (p∼0.001) in training in comparison to competition. Two-thirds of injured participants required medical attention, with 15% requiring surgery. Participants requiring surgical treatment were six and a half times more likely to consider quitting compared to those requiring other treatments, including no treatment (OR: 6.50, 95% CI: 1.53–27.60). Participants required to take more than four months off training were five and a half times more likely to consider quitting compared to those who took less time off (OR: 5.48, 95% CI: 2.25–13.38). We identified that nine out of ten jiu-jitsu practitioners surveyed suffered injury while in training and the most severe injuries for the majority of practitioners occurring during training. The most common injuries identified involved the fingers, neck, knee, and shoulder, with the majority of respondents seeking medical or surgical treatment or requiring physiotherapy or rehabilitation. Potential participants in BJJ should be informed regarding significant risk of injury and instructed regarding appropriate precautions and safety protocols. BJJ practitioners and instructors should be especially cognizant of safety during training, where the majority of injuries occur

Aim. Infection rates after management of open fractures are still high. Existing guidelines regarding prevention of this complication are inhomogeneous. A survey directed to orthopaedic trauma surgeons worldwide aims to give an overview of current practices in the management of open fractures. Method. An international group of trauma surgeons and infection specialists with experience in the field of musculoskeletal infections developed a questionnaire that was distributed via email to all AOTrauma members worldwide. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results. 1197 orthopaedic trauma surgeons answered the survey (response rate: 4,9% of all opened emails). Cephalosporins are the most commonly used antibiotics for systemic prophylaxis in open fractures (cefazolin: 51,46% cefuroxime: 23,6%, ceftriaxone: 14,54%). In Gustilo type III open fractures gentamicin (49,12%) and metronidazole (33,58%) are often added. 86% (n=1033) reported to give the first dosage of systemic antibiotics in the emergency department as soon as the patient arrives. Only 3% (n=34) reported pre-hospital administration at the scene of the accident or during transport to the hospital. While most respondents administer antibiotics over 24h in type I open fractures (34%, n=405), for type II open fractures the most often mentioned duration is 72h (26%, n=306). For type III a 7 days course was most often performed (38%, n=448). Overall, there is a tendency to longer durations with increasing severity. However, a vast majority agreed that the optimal duration is not well defined in the literature (71%, n=849). 20psi,”Jet-Lavage”). The amount of irrigation fluid has a bimodal distribution with two peaks at 4–6 liters (24%, n=286) and at 8–10 liters (24%, n=282). Conclusions. Results from our survey give an overview of current practices and identify certain aspects in the management of open fractures where treatment protocols are very heterogenous and guidelines not well accepted. These controversies demand for further research in this field to provide better evidence

INTRODUCTION. The advent of CT based 3D preoperative planning software for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) provides surgeons with more data than ever before to prepare for a case. Interestingly, as the usage of such software has increased, further questions have appeared over the optimal way to plan and place a glenoid implant for RTSA. In this study, a survey of shoulder specialists from the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) was conducted to examine thought patterns in current RTSA implant selection and placement. METHODS. 172 ASES members completed an 18-question survey on their thought process for how they select and place a RTSA glenoid implant. Data was collected using a custom online Survey Monkey survey. Surgeon answers were split into two cohorts based on number of arthroplasties performed per year: between 0–75 was considered low volume (LV), and between 75–200+ was considered high volume (HV). Data was analyzed for each cohort to examine differences in thought patterns, implant selection, and implant placement. RESULTS. 70 surgeons were grouped into the LV cohort, and 102 surgeons were grouped into the HV cohort. 46.1% of surgeons in the HV cohort reported using a preoperative planning software for the majority of cases, 48% reported seldom use, and 5.9% reported no use. In the LV cohort, 41.4% reported use for the majority of cases, 24.3% reported seldom use, and 34.3% reported no use (Figure 1). When questioned on what percentage of RTSA cases do surgeons use augmented glenoid implants, 26.7% in the HV cohort responded never using augments vs. 32.4% in the LV cohort, 32.7% responded using augments <15% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 30.9% in the LV cohort, 26.7% responded using augments between 15–45% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 27.9% in the LV cohort, and 13.8% responded using augments >45% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 8.8% in the LV cohort (Figure 2). When asked what the maximum allowable superior inclination for a RTSA glenoid implant is, surgeons answered 10° 20.6% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 30% in the LV cohort, 5° 18.6% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 25.7% in the LV cohort, 0° 38.2% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 25.7% in the LV cohort, and no fixed degree 22.5% of the time in the HV cohort vs. 18.6% in the LV cohort (Figure 3). CONCLUSION. The results of this study show that even within a group of highly trained surgeons, there are widely varying opinions on how to plan the optimal RTSA case. Variation between high and low volume surgeons reveals even greater differences, suggesting that experience affects thought pattern. Despite these differences, there is no way to prove the optimal implant selection and placement without consistent data collection and long-term clinical outcomes. Machine learning on large preoperative planning databases combined with clinical outcomes data may provide further clarity on optimal implant placement and selection. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic presents an unprecedented burden on global healthcare systems, and existing infrastructures must adapt and evolve to meet the challenge. With health systems reliant on the health of their workforce, the importance of protection against disease transmission in healthcare workers (HCWs) is clear. This study collated responses from several countries, provided by clinicians familiar with practice in each location, to identify areas of best practice and policy so as to build consensus of those measures that might reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19 to HCWs at work. Methods. A cross-sectional descriptive survey was designed with ten open and closed questions and sent to a representative sample. The sample was selected on a convenience basis of 27 senior surgeons, members of an international surgical society, who were all frontline workers in the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was reported according to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) checklist. Results. Responses were received by all 27 surgeons from 22 countries across six continents. A number of the study respondents reported COVID-19-related infection and mortality in HCWs in their countries. Differing areas of practice and policy were identified and organized into themes including the specification of units receiving COVID-19 patients, availability and usage of personal protective equipment (PPE), other measures to reduce staff exposure, and communicating with and supporting HCWs. Areas more specific to surgery also identified some variation in practice and policy in relation to visitors to the hospital, the outpatient department, and in the operating room for both non-urgent and emergency care. Conclusion. COVID-19 presents a disproportionate risk to HCWs, potentially resulting in a diminished health system capacity, and consequently an impairment to population health. Implementation of these recommendations at an international level could provide a framework to reduce this burden

Introduction:. Total Hip Replacement (THR) is a proven and effective surgical procedure. One of the main limiting factors of the longevity of THR is the performance of the bearing surface. The optimum bearing surface choice, however, remains controversial. We wanted to understand what influenced the choice of bearing surfaces amongst South African orthopaedic surgeons. We also wanted to know if there was any consensus between surgeons and the orthopaedic trade. Aims, material and methods:. There is no epidemiological registry-based data available in South Africa in respect of bearing surfaces used in hip replacements. We sent out an electronic survey to all members of the South African Orthopaedic Association as well as to trade representatives. Patient parameters influencing the choice of bearing surfaces were surveyed and these included age, gender, level of activity and diagnosis. We used a regressional and tree analysis methodology to interpret the results. Results:. We received 133 responses from orthopaedic surgeons. There were no differences in decision making and bearing surface choices according to the surgeon's experience, type of practice or fellowship training. It was statistically significant that age was the first and most important factor when deciding upon a bearing surface. The patient's activity level then played a secondary role in the final choice. We show that gender and clinical diagnosis played no significant part in decision-making. Ceramic-on-ceramic combinations were used most commonly in younger patients and metal-on-polyethylene in older patients. 73% of surgeons chose metal-on-polyethylene in patients older than 70 years. There were no surgeons who selected metal-on-metal or ceramic-on-metal combinations for any patients. Metal-on-polyethylene was the first choice in 51% of patients with a low-activity level and 23% of those patients with a high level of activity. Ceramic-on-ceramic and ceramic-on-polyethylene was the first choice in patients with a high level of activity by 32% and 34% of surgeons respectively. We received 51 responses from the trade representatives surveyed. There was no difference between the surgeons and the trade representatives in respect of their decision making when advising on bearing surfaces to be used in specific patients. Conclusion:. While each bearing surface combination has advantages and disadvantages we have demonstrated the rationale behind the decision making and the current trends in choices of bearing surfaces by South African orthopaedic surgeons. We note that our surgeon's choices are in line with international trends, especially in respect of metal containing bearing surfaces. We have also shown that the orthopaedic trade representative's guidelines are in keeping with those of the profession

Introduction. Technology in Orthopaedic surgery has become more widespread in the past 20 years, with emerging evidence of its benefits in arthroplasty. Although patients are aware of benefits of conventional joint replacement, little is known on patients' knowledge of the prevalence, benefits or drawbacks of surgery involving navigation or robotic systems. Materials and methods. In an outpatient arthroplasty clinic, 100 consecutive patients were approached and given questionnaires to assess their knowledge of Navigation and Robotics in Orthopaedic surgery. Participation in the survey was voluntary. Results. 98 patients volunteered to participate in the survey, mean age 56.2 years (range 19–88; 52 female, 46 male). 40% of patients believed more than 30% of NHS Orthopaedic operations involved navigation or robotics; 80% believed this was the same level or less than the private sector. A third believed most of an operation could be performed independently by a robotic/navigation system. Amongst perceived benefits of navigation/robotic surgery was more accurate surgery(47%), quicker surgery (50%) and making the surgeon's job easier (52%). 69% believed navigation/robotics was more expensive and 20% believed it held no benefit against conventional surgery, with only 9% believing it led to longer surgery. Almost 50% would not mind at least some of their operation being performed with use of robotics/navigation, with a significantly greater proportion of these coming from patients aged under 50 years. Conclusions. Although few patients were familiar with this new technology, there appeared to be a strong consensus it was quicker and more accurate than conventional surgery. Many patients appear to believe navigation and robotics in Orthopaedic surgery is largely the preserve of the private sector. This study demonstrates public knowledge of such new technologies is limited and a need to inform patients of the relative merits and drawbacks of such surgery prior to their more widespread implementation

Introduction:. Infection as an indication for revision has increased to 12% of the total revisions (UK NJR 9. th. report). However, it is next to impossible to find out the cause for a delayed prosthetic infection. With increasing number of arthroplasty procedures, is there a need for prophylactic antibiotics in patients with prostheses?. Methods:. At London Knee Meeting 2012, a total of 163 surgeons were asked to take part in a survey. This was to find out if they knew of any existing guidelines for prophylaxis for dental procedures, if there was a need to practice more uniformly, and if they recommend such prophylaxis to their patients routinely. The grade of the surgeon and their experience in years was also noted. Results:. Among the 163 surgeons who participated, 102 (62.6%) were arthroplasty surgeons. Of these, 73 (71.5%) were consultants with 3 or more years of experience. For this study, responses from these 102 surgeons were taken into consideration. Out of the 102 surgeons, only 39 (38%) were aware of AAOS recommendations. However, only 26 (25.5%) felt the need for such prophylaxis, other 37 (36%) were not sure if such prophylaxis was necessary. The remaining 39 (38.5%) did not think the prophylaxis was necessary. There was no difference found in the responses between the consultant and non-consultant surgeons. Conclusions:. From this survey, it is clear that there is no uniformity of the knowledge of existing recommendations for prophylaxis of such patients with prostheses. There is probably a need to develop robust guidelines for prophylaxis, given the devastating nature of an infected prosthesis

Introduction

Perception of ACL injury prevention programs amongst professional netball players and coaches has not been studied. We investigated (1) level of awareness and experience of ACL injury prevention programs; (2) use of ACL injury prevention programs; and (3) barriers to implementing ACL injury prevention program in netball.