Aim: To assess whether use of the Pavlik harness for the management of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) can safely be discontinued without weaning.

Method: The study group comprised babies diagnosed with DDH at the Royal Liverpool Children’s hospital over a 10 year period, between January 1995 and August 2004. The decision to instigate treatment with a Pavlik harness was based upon the Graf grade. We used Graf IIB or worse as our treatment threshold for the use of the Pavlik harness. In our practice the harness was removed when the hips were ultrasonographically and clinically normal, without a period of weaning.

Results: There were 368 hips (273 babies) for analysis, 178 cases of unilateral DDH (128 left hips and 50 right hips) and 95 bilateral cases. Mean age at diagnosis was 59 days (range 1 – 187 days) with twenty-six patients presenting late after the usual 120 day time limit. Treatment with the Pavlik harness was successful in normalising 323 hips (87.8%). The Pavlik harness was unsuccessful in reducing 45 dislocations (12.2%). Patients were followed-up for a mean of 4.1 ± 2.7 years with no deterioration of acetabular indices on plane radiographs, according to the Tonnis classification. There were 4 hips with possible grade I avascular necrosis. To date there have been no cases of late dysplasia.

Conclusions: Although many units remove the harness after a period of gradual weaning, practice is varied. Since we did not encounter any negative outcome despite not weaning we conclude that that weaning is unnecessary.

Aim: To assess the effectiveness of a physiotherapist led normal variant clinic for children.

Method: The study comprised all children presenting to the physiotherapy clinic at the Royal Liverpool Children’s hospital between January 2000 and January 2006. The clinic is run by two specialist physiotherapists alongside a consultant led Orthopaedic clinic, providing support as required. Physiotherapy staff are able to request and interpret radiographs and order blood tests independently. The numbers of patients, the range of conditions seen in the clinic, and the outcome of the consultations recorded in the practitioner case-notes were examined for the purpose of this study.

Complete data was available for the full period under review except for the year 2003.

Results: During the five year study period 1594 children were seen, a mean of 318 patients annually (range 267–387). The age distribution of patients was 33.1% (527) under the age of 2, 38.9% (620) 2–5 years, 19.3% (307) 5–10 years and 8.8% (140) 10–16 years. The most common conditions seen were genu valgum 28.7% (458), genu varum 18.4% (293), in-toeing 14.7% (234) and toe walking 6.0% (96). Most patients (94.7% n=1509) were managed independent of consultant supervision by the physiotherapist. A minority of patients required consultant review in the clinic (4.2% n=67). Fewer still were referred to another medical clinic (1.1% n=18).

Conclusions: Children with a spectrum of orthopaedic conditions can be appropriately managed by a trained physiotherapist independent of consultant input.

Aim: To demonstrate that the conservative management of meralgia paraesthetica in children is effective.

Method: Clinic case-notes of the senior author (CB) were retrospectively searched between January 1997 and February 2007 to identify cases of meralgia paraesthetica. Sixteen cases were discovered in fourteen patients, 6 right, 6 left, and 2 bilateral. Four patients had had previous pelvic surgery and two combined pelvic and femoral osteotomy for developmental dysplasia of the hip. One underwent bilateral pinning for slipped upper femoral epiphyses. Clinical symptoms were assessed subjectively. All patients were initially managed conservatively with NSAIDs and counselled to avoid tight fitting clothing across the waist. If symptoms had failed to settle at follow-up a local anaesthetic/steroid injection was administered to the site of maximal tenderness. Surgical decompression was performed for intractable cases.

Results: There were 10 females and 4 males, with a mean age of 13.6 years (8–17). Mean follow-up was 15 months (1–50).

Eleven cases (68.8%) improved with conservative management and a further three cases improved following a local anaesthetic/steroid injection. Two cases (12.5%) who did not improve with these measures underwent surgical decompression with subsequent improvement in symptoms. No side effects were reported from the either the steroid injection or surgical decompression.

Conclusions: There is no current evidence supporting the management of meralgia paraesthetica in children. In adults, this elusive diagnosis is managed conservatively to good effect. This retrospective study demonstrates that conservative management is also effective in paediatric patients. In those cases where symptoms prove intractable, surgical decompression produces clinical improvement.

Introduction: Radiation dose exposure to patients in a main X-ray department in a hospital is well documented and controlled. Few studies report the radiation exposure to patients undergoing spinal surgery received from an image intensifier. There are no recommended doses published when using the image intensifier

Methods: We reviewed the radiation doses and exposure times from computer and radiation log records of all the patients who underwent trauma & orthopaedic surgery which required an image intensifier between January and September 2005. The Dose-Area-Product (Gray/cm2) and screening time was recorded.

Results: More than 600 patients underwent trauma & orthopaedic surgery that required an image intensifier at the time of surgery. The mean screening Dose Area Product of the patients undergoing spinal surgery and other common procedures are shown (Gray/cm2):- Lumbar fusion – 23. Disc replacement – 10. Discogram – 4.9. Foraminal injection – 4.4. DHS – 1.86. IMHS – 1.33. ORIF Ankle – 0.89. MUA k-wire wrist – 0.04. The four surgical procedures which required the most radiation were spinal procedures. The maximum radiation is given to patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.

Conclusion: Patients undergoing spinal surgery can receive as much radiation exposure as those undergoing procedures such as barium swallow or standard lumbar spine films. Efforts should be made to reduce radiation exposure to orthopaedic patients, and operating surgeons especially those undergoing spinal surgery. By publishing our radiation exposure doses, we can begin to establish guidelines for recommended patient doses.