Aims. The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis. Methods. This retrospective cohort study used Australian national arthroplasty registry data from January 2013 to January 2021 to identify participants who underwent elective staged BTKA with six to 24 months between procedures. The primary outcome was Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at six months postoperatively for the first TKA compared to the second TKA, adjusted for age and sex. Secondary outcomes compared six-month EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) domain scores, EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) between knees at six months postoperatively. Results. The cohort included 635 participants (1,270 primary procedures). Preoperative scores were worse in the first knee compared to the second for all instruments; however, comparing the first knee at six months postoperatively with the second knee at six months postoperatively, the mean between-knee difference was minimal for OKS (-0.8 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to -0.2), EQ-VAS (3.3; 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7), and EQ-5D index (0.09 points; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.12). Outcomes for the EQ-5D-5L domains ‘mobility’, ‘usual activities’, and ‘pain/discomfort’ were better following the second TKA. Conclusion. At six months postoperatively, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the first and second TKA in either the joint-specific or overall generic health-related quality of life outcomes. However, individual domain scores assessing mobility, pain, and usual activities were notably higher after the second TKA, likely reflecting the cumulative improvement in quality of life after both knees have been replaced. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):202–209

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented disruption to elective orthopaedic services. The primary objective of this study was to examine changes in functional scores in patients awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Secondary objectives were to investigate differences between these groups and identify those in a health state ‘worse than death’ (WTD). Methods. In this prospective cohort study, preoperative Oxford hip and knee scores (OHS/OKS) were recorded for patients added to a waiting list for THA, TKA, or UKA, during the initial eight months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and repeated at 14 months into the pandemic (mean interval nine months (SD 2.84)). EuroQoL five-dimension five-level health questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) index scores were also calculated at this point in time, with a negative score representing a state WTD. OHS/OKS were analyzed over time and in relation to the EQ-5D-5L. Results. A total of 174 patients (58 THA, 74 TKA, 42 UKA) were eligible, after 27 were excluded (one died, seven underwent surgery, 19 non-responders). The overall mean OHS/OKS deteriorated from 15.43 (SD 6.92), when patients were added to the waiting list, to 11.77 (SD 6.45) during the pandemic (p < 0.001). There were significantly worse EQ-5D-5L index scores in the THA group (p = 0.005), with 22 of these patients (38%) in a health state WTD, than either the TKA group (20 patients; 27% WTD), or the UKA group (nine patients; 21% WTD). A strong positive correlation between the EQ-5D-5L index score and OHS/OKS was observed (r = 0.818; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that an OHS/OKS lower than nine predicted a health state WTD (88% sensitivity and 73% specificity). Conclusion. OHS/OKS deteriorated significantly among patients awaiting lower limb arthroplasty during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 51 patients were in a health state WTD, representing 29% of our entire cohort, which is considerably worse than existing pre-pandemic data. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(3):138–145

Aims. The exact risk to patients undergoing surgery who develop COVID-19 is not yet fully known. This study aims to provide the current data to allow adequate consent regarding the risks of post-surgery COVID-19 infection and subsequent COVID-19-related mortality. Methods. All orthopaedic trauma cases at the Wrightington Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust from ‘lockdown’ (23 March 2020) to date (15 June 2020) were collated and split into three groups. Adult ambulatory trauma surgeries (upper limb trauma, ankle fracture, tibial plateau fracture) and regional-specific referrals (periprosthetic hip fracture) were performed at a stand-alone elective site that accepted COVID-19-negative patients. Neck of femur fractures (NOFF) and all remaining non-NOFF (paediatric trauma, long bone injury) surgeries were performed at an acute site hospital (mixed green/blue site). Patients were swabbed for COVID-19 before surgery on both sites. Age, sex, nature of surgery, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, associated comorbidity, length of stay, development of post-surgical COVID-19 infection, and post-surgical COVID-19-related deaths were collected. Results. At the elective site, 225 patients underwent orthopaedic trauma surgery; two became COVID-19-positive (0.9%) in the immediate perioperative period, neither of which was fatal. At the acute site, 93 patients underwent non-NOFF trauma surgery, of whom six became COVID-19-positive (6.5%) and three died. A further 84 patients underwent NOFF surgery, seven becoming COVID-19 positive (8.3%) and five died. Conclusion. At the elective site, the rate of COVID-19 infection following orthopaedic trauma surgery was low, at 0.9%. At the acute mixed site (typical district general hospital), for non-NOFF surgery there was a 6.5% incidence of post-surgical COVID-19 infection (seven-fold higher risk) with 50% COVID-19 mortality; for NOFF surgery, there was an 8.3% incidence of post-surgical COVID-19 infection, with 71% COVID-19 mortality. This is likely to have significance when planning a resumption of elective orthopaedic surgery and for consent to the patient. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:556–561

Aims. The safe resumption of elective orthopaedic surgery following the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant challenge. A number of institutions have developed a COVID-free pathway for elective surgery patients in order to minimize the risk of viral transmission. The aim of this study is to identify the perioperative viral transmission rate in elective orthopaedic patients following the restart of elective surgery. Methods. This is a prospective study of 121 patients who underwent elective orthopaedic procedures through a COVID-free pathway. All patients underwent a 14-day period of self-isolation, had a negative COVID-19 test within 72 hours of surgery, and underwent surgery at a COVID-free site. Baseline patient characteristics were recorded including age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, body mass index (BMI), procedure, and admission type. Patients were contacted 14 days following discharge to determine if they had had a positive COVID-19 test (COVID-confirmed) or developed symptoms consistent with COVID-19 (COVID-19-presumed). Results. The study included 74 females (61.2%) and 47 males (38.8%) with a mean age of 52.3 years ± 17.6 years (18 to 83 years). The ASA grade was grade I in 26 patients (21.5%), grade II in 70 patients (57.9%), grade III in 24 patients (19.8%), and grade IV in one patient (0.8%). A total of 18 patients (14.9%) had underlying cardiovascular disease, 17 (14.0%) had pulmonary disease, and eight (6.6%) had diabetes mellitus. No patients (0%) had a positive COVID-19 test in the postoperative period. One patient (0.8%) developed anosmia postoperatively without respiratory symptoms or a fever. The patient did not undergo a COVID-19 test and self-isolated for seven days. Her symptoms resolved within a few days. Conclusion. The development of a COVID-free pathway for elective orthopaedic patients results in very low viral transmission rates. While both surgeons and patients should remain vigilant, elective surgery can be safely restarted using dedicated pathways and procedures. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:562–567

Aims. Shoulder arthroplasty is effective in the management of end-stage glenohumeral joint arthritis. However, it is major surgery and patients must balance multiple factors when considering the procedure. An understanding of patients’ decision-making processes may facilitate greater support of those considering shoulder arthroplasty and inform the outcomes of future research. Methods. Participants were recruited from waiting lists of three consultant upper limb surgeons across two NHS hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 participants who were awaiting elective shoulder arthroplasty. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Systematic coding was performed; initial codes were categorized and further developed into summary narratives through a process of discussion and refinement. Data collection and analyses continued until thematic saturation was reached. Results. Two overall categories emerged: the motivations to consider surgery, and the information participants used to inform their decision-making. Motivations were, broadly, the relief of pain and the opportunity to get on with life and regain independence. When participants’ symptoms and restrictions prevented them enjoying life to a sufficient extent, this provided the motivation to proceed with surgery. Younger participants tended to focus on maintaining employment and recreational activities, and older patients were eager to make the most of their remaining lifetime. Participants gathered information from a range of sources and were keen to optimize their recovery where possible. An important factor for participants was whether they trusted their surgeon and were prepared to delegate responsibility for elements of their care. Conclusion. Relief of pain and the opportunity to get on with life were the primary reasons to undergo shoulder arthroplasty. Participants highlighted the importance of the patient-surgeon relationship and the need for accurate information in an accessible format which is relevant to people of different ages and functional demands. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):543–549

Aims. The benefit of a dual-mobility acetabular component (DMC) for primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) is controversial. This study aimed to compare the dislocation and complication rates when using a DMC compared to single-mobility (SM) acetabular component in primary elective THA using data collected at a single centre, and compare the revision rates and survival outcomes in these two groups. Methods. Between 2010 and 2019, 2,075 primary THAs using either a cementless DM or SM acetabular component were included. Indications for DMC were patients aged older than 70 years or with high risk of dislocation. All other patients received a SM acetabular component. Exclusion criteria were cemented implants, patients treated for femoral neck fracture, and follow-up of less than one year. In total, 1,940 THAs were analyzed: 1,149 DMC (59.2%) and 791 SM (40.8%). The mean age was 73 years (SD 9.2) in the DMC group and 57 years (SD 12) in the SM group. Complications and revisions have been analyzed retrospectively. Results. The mean follow-up was 41.9 months (SD 14; 12 to 134). There were significantly fewer dislocations in the DMC group (n = 2; 0.17%) compared to the SM group (n = 8; 1%) (p = 0.019). The femoral head size did not influence the dislocation rate in the SM group (p = 0.702). The overall complication rate in the DMC group was 5.1% (n = 59) and in the SM group was 6.7% (n = 53); these were not statistically different (p = 0.214). No specific complications were attributed to the use of DMCs. In the DMC group, 18 THAs (1.6%) were revised versus 15 THAs in the SM group (1.9%) (p = 0.709). There was no statistical difference for any cause of revisions in both groups. The acetabular component aseptic revision-free survival rates at five years were 98% in the DMC group and 97.3% in the SM group (p = 0.780). Conclusion. The use of a monobloc DMC had a lower risk of dislocation in a high-risk population than SM component in a low-risk population at the mid-term follow-up. There was no significant risk of component-specific complications or revisions with DMCs in this large cohort. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):81–88

Aim. Restarting elective services presents a challenge to restore and improve many of the planned patient care pathways which have been suspended during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A significant backlog of planned elective work has built up representing a considerable volume of patient need. We aimed to investigate the health status, quality of life, and the impact of delay for patients whose referrals and treatment for symptomatic joint arthritis had been delayed as a result of the response to COVID-19. Methods. We interviewed 111 patients referred to our elective outpatient service and whose first appointments had been cancelled as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results. Patients reported significant impacts on their health status and quality of life. Overall, 79 (71.2%) patients reported a further deterioration in their condition while waiting, with seven (6.3%) evaluating their health status as ‘worse than death’. Conclusions. Waiting lists are clearly not benign and how to prioritize patients, their level of need, and access to assessment and treatment must be more sophisticated than simply relying on the length of time a patient has been waiting. This paper supports the contention that patients awaiting elective joint arthroplasty report significant impacts on their quality of life and health status. This should be given appropriate weight when patients are prioritized for surgery as part of the recovery of services following the COVID-19 pandemic. Elective surgery should not be seen as optional surgery—patients do not see it in this way

Aims. COVID-19 has compounded a growing waiting list problem, with over 4.5 million patients now waiting for planned elective care in the UK. Views of patients on waiting lists are rarely considered in prioritization. Our primary aim was to understand how to support patients on waiting lists by hearing their experiences, concerns, and expectations. The secondary aim was to capture objective change in disability and coping mechanisms. Methods. A minimum representative sample of 824 patients was required for quantitative analysis to provide a 3% margin of error. Sampling was stratified by body region (upper/lower limb, spine) and duration on the waiting list. Questionnaires were sent to a random sample of elective orthopaedic waiting list patients with their planned intervention paused due to COVID-19. Analyzed parameters included baseline health, change in physical/mental health status, challenges and coping strategies, preferences/concerns regarding treatment, and objective quality of life (EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item scale (GAD-2)). Qualitative analysis was performed via the Normalization Process Theory. Results. A total of 888 patients responded. Better health, pain, and mood scores were reported by upper limb patients. The longest waiters reported better health but poorer mood and anxiety scores. Overall, 82% had tried self-help measures to ease symptoms; 94% wished to proceed with their intervention; and 21% were prepared to tolerate deferral. Qualitative analysis highlighted the overall patient mood to be represented by the terms ‘understandable’, ‘frustrated’, ‘pain’, ‘disappointed’, and ‘not happy/depressed’. COVID-19-mandated health and safety measures and technology solutions were felt to be implemented well. However, patients struggled with access to doctors and pain management, quality of life (physical and psychosocial) deterioration, and delay updates. Conclusion. This is the largest study to hear the views of this ‘hidden’ cohort. Our findings are widely relevant to ensure provision of better ongoing support and communication, mostly within the constraints of current resources. In response, we developed a reproducible local action plan to address highlighted issues. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):583–593

Aims. Patients with a high comorbidity burden (HCB) can achieve similar improvements in quality of life compared with low-risk patients, but greater morbidity may deter surgeons from operating on these patients. Whether surgeon volume influences total hip arthroplasty (THA) outcomes in HCB patients has not been investigated. This study aimed to compare complication rates and implant survivorship in HCB patients operated on by high-volume (HV) and non-HV THA surgeons. Methods. Patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade of III or IV, undergoing primary elective THA between January 2013 and December 2021, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were separated into groups based on whether they were operated on by a HV surgeon (defined as the top 25% of surgeons at our institution by number of primary THAs per year) or a non-HV surgeon. Groups were propensity-matched 1:1 to control for demographic variables. A total of 1,134 patients were included in the matched analysis. Between groups, 90-day readmissions and revisions were compared, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate implant survivorship within the follow-up period. Results. Years of experience were comparable between non-HV and HV surgeons (p = 0.733). The HV group had significantly shorter surgical times (p < 0.001) and shorter length of stay (p = 0.009) than the non-HV group. The HV group also had significantly fewer 90-day readmissions (p = 0.030), all-cause revisions (p = 0.023), and septic revisions (p = 0.020) compared with the non-HV group at latest follow-up. The HV group had significantly greater freedom from all-cause (p = 0.023) and septic revision (p = 0.020) than the non-HV group. Conclusion. The HCB THA patients have fewer 90-day readmissions, all-cause revisions, and septic revisions, as well as shorter length of stay when treated by HV surgeons. THA candidates with a HCB may benefit from referral to HV surgeons to reduce procedural risk and improve postoperative outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):10–16

Aims. Elective operating was halted during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase the capacity to provide care to an unprecedented volume of critically unwell patients. During the pandemic, the orthopaedic department at the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board restructured the trauma service, relocating semi-urgent ambulatory trauma operating to the isolated clean elective centre (St. Woolos’ Hospital) from the main hospital receiving COVID-19 patients (Royal Gwent Hospital). This study presents our experience of providing semi-urgent trauma care in a COVID-19-free surgical unit as a safe way to treat trauma patients during the pandemic and a potential model for restarting an elective orthopaedic service. Methods. All patients undergoing surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic at the orthopaedic surgical unit (OSU) in St. Woolos’ Hospital from 23 March 2020 to 24 April 2020 were included. All patients that were operated on had a telephone follow-up two weeks after surgery to assess if they had experienced COVID-19 symptoms or had been tested for COVID-19. The nature of admission, operative details, and patient demographics were obtained from the health board’s electronic record. Staff were assessed for sickness, self-isolation, and COVID-19 status. Results. A total of 58 surgical procedures were undertaken at the OSU during the study period; 93% (n = 54) of patients completed the telephone follow-up. Open reduction and internal fixation of ankle and wrist fractures were the most common procedures. None of the patients nor members of their households had developed symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 or required testing. No staff members reported sick days or were advised by occupational health to undergo viral testing. Conclusion. This study provides optimism that orthopaedic patients planned for surgery can be protected from COVID-19 nosocomial transmission at separate COVID-19-free sites. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:302–308

Aims. To identify variables independently associated with same-day discharge (SDD) of patients following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and to develop machine learning algorithms to predict suitable candidates for outpatient rTKA. Methods. Data were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Programme (ACS-NSQIP) database from the years 2018 to 2020. Patients with elective, unilateral rTKA procedures and a total hospital length of stay between zero and four days were included. Demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables were analyzed. A multivariable logistic regression (MLR) model and various machine learning techniques were compared using area under the curve (AUC), calibration, and decision curve analysis. Important and significant variables were identified from the models. Results. Of the 5,600 patients included in this study, 342 (6.1%) underwent SDD. The random forest (RF) model performed the best overall, with an internally validated AUC of 0.810. The ten crucial factors favoring SDD in the RF model include operating time, anaesthesia type, age, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, race, history of diabetes, rTKA type, sex, and smoking status. Eight of these variables were also found to be significant in the MLR model. Conclusion. The RF model displayed excellent accuracy and identified clinically important variables for determining candidates for SDD following rTKA. Machine learning techniques such as RF will allow clinicians to accurately risk-stratify their patients preoperatively, in order to optimize resources and improve patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(6):399–407

Aims. As our population ages, the number of octogenarians who will require a total hip arthroplasty (THA) rises. In a value-based system where operative outcomes are linked to hospital payments, it is necessary to assess the outcomes in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of elective, primary THA in patients ≥ 80 years old to those aged < 80. Methods. A retrospective review of 10,251 consecutive THA cases from 2011 to 2019 was conducted. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)), as well as demographic, readmission, and complication data, were collected. Results. On average, the younger cohort (YC, n = 10,251) was a mean 61.60 years old (SD 10.71), while the older cohort (OC, n = 609) was 84.25 years old (SD 3.02) (p < 0.001). The OC had greater surgical risk based on their higher mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (2.74 (SD 0.63) vs 2.30 (SD 0.63); p < 0.001) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores (6.26 (SD 1.71) vs 3.87 (SD 1.98); p < 0.001). While the OC stayed in the hospital longer than the YC (mean 3.5 vs 2.5 days; p < 0.001), there were no differences in 90-day emergency visits (p = 0.083), myocardial infarctions (p = 0.993), periprosthetic joint infections (p = 0.214), dislocations (p = 0.993), or aseptic failure (p = 0.993). The YC was more likely to be readmitted within 90 days (3.88% vs 2.18%, Β = 0.57; p = 0.048). There were no observed differences in 12-week (p = 0.518) or one-year (p = 0.511) HOOS scores. Conclusion. Although patients ≥ 80 years old have a greater number of comorbidities than younger patients, they had equivalent perioperative complication rates and PRO scores. This study demonstrates the safety and success of elective THA in octogenarians. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):535–539

Aims. While preoperative bloodwork is routinely ordered, its value in determining which patients are at risk of postoperative readmission following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine which routinely ordered preoperative blood markers have the strongest association with acute hospital readmission for patients undergoing elective TKA and THA. Methods. Two population-based retrospective cohorts were assembled for all adult primary elective TKA (n = 137,969) and THA (n = 78,532) patients between 2011 to 2018 across 678 North American hospitals using the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Programme (ACS-NSQIP) registry. Six routinely ordered preoperative blood markers - albumin, haematocrit, platelet count, white blood cell count (WBC), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and sodium level - were queried. The association between preoperative blood marker values and all-cause readmission within 30 days of surgery was compared using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic regression adjusted for relevant patient and treatment factors. Results. The mean TKA age was 66.6 years (SD 9.6) with 62% being females (n = 85,163/137,969), while in the THA cohort the mean age was 64.7 years (SD 11.4) with 54% being female (n = 42,637/78,532). In both cohorts, preoperative hypoalbuminemia (< 35 g/l) was associated with a 1.5- and 1.8-times increased odds of 30-day readmission following TKA and THA, respectively. In TKA patients, decreased eGFR demonstrated the strongest association with acute readmission with a standardized odds ratio of 0.75 per two standard deviations increase (p < 0.0001). Conclusion. In this population level cohort analysis of arthroplasty patients, low albumin demonstrated the strongest association with acute readmission in comparison to five other commonly ordered preoperative blood markers. Identification and optimization of preoperative hypoalbuminemia could help healthcare providers recognize and address at-risk patients undergoing TKA and THA. This is the most comprehensive and rigorous examination of the association between preoperative blood markers and readmission for TKA and THA patients to date. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(6):388–396

Aims. We present the development of a day-case total hip arthroplasty (THA) pathway in a UK National Health Service institution in conjunction with an extensive evidence-based summary of the interventions used to achieve successful day-case THA to which the protocol is founded upon. Methods. We performed a prospective audit of day-case THA in our institution as we reinitiate our full capacity elective services. In parallel, we performed a review of the literature reporting complication or readmission rates at ≥ 30-day postoperative following day-case THA. Electronic searches were performed using four databases from the date of inception to November 2020. Relevant studies were identified, data extracted, and qualitative synthesis performed. Results. Our evaluation and critique of the evidence-based literature identifies day-case THA to be safe, effective, and economical, benefiting both patients and healthcare systems alike. We further validate this with our institutional elective day surgery arthroplasty pathway (EDSAP) and report a small cohort of successful day-case THA cases as an example in the early stages of this practice in our unit. Conclusion. Careful patient selection and education, adequate perioperative considerations, including multimodal analgesia, surgical technique and blood loss management protocols and appropriate postoperative pathways comprising reliable discharge criteria are essential for successful day-case THA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):93–102

Aims. Hip fracture patients are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness, and admission into hospital puts them at further risk. We implemented a two-site orthopaedic trauma service, with ‘COVID’ and ‘COVID-free’ hubs, to deliver urgent and infection-controlled trauma care for hip fracture patients, while increasing bed capacity for medical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. A vacated private elective surgical centre was repurposed to facilitate a two-site, ‘COVID’ and ‘COVID-free’, hip fracture service. Patients were screened for COVID-19 infection and either kept at our ‘COVID’ site or transferred to our ‘COVID-free’ site. We collected data for 30 days on patient demographics, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Nottingham Hip Fracture Scores (NHFS), time to surgery, COVID-19 status, mortality, and length of stay (LOS). Results. In all, 47 hip fracture patients presented to our service: 12 were admitted to the ‘COVID’ site and 35 to the ‘COVID-free’ site. The ‘COVID’ site cohort were older (mean 86.8 vs 78.5 years, p = 0.0427) and with poorer CFS (p = 0.0147) and NHFS (p = 0.0023) scores. At the ‘COVID-free’ site, mean time to surgery was less (29.8 vs 52.8 hours, p = 0.0146), and mean LOS seemed shorter (8.7 vs 12.6 days, p = 0.0592). No patients tested positive for COVID-19 infection while at the ‘COVID-free’ site. We redirected 74% of our admissions from the base ‘COVID’ site and created 304 inpatient days’ capacity for medical COVID patients. Conclusion. Acquisition of unused elective orthopaedic capacity from the private sector facilitated a two-site trauma service. Patients were treated expeditiously, while successfully achieving strict infection control. We achieved significant gains in medical bed capacity in response to the COVID-19 demand. The authors propose the repurposing of unused elective operating facilities for a two-site ‘COVID’ and ‘COVID-free’ model as a safe and effective way of managing hip fracture patients during the pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:190–197

Aims. Repeated lumbar spine surgery has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine and quantify the impact of this association in a national clinical register cohort. Methods. This is a population-based study from the Norwegian Registry for Spine surgery (NORspine). We included 26,723 consecutive cases operated for lumbar spinal stenosis or lumbar disc herniation from January 2007 to December 2018. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), presented as the proportions reaching a patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS; defined as an ODI raw score ≤ 22) and ODI raw and change scores at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the Global Perceived Effect scale, the numerical rating scale for pain, the EuroQoL five-dimensions health questionnaire, occurrence of perioperative complications and wound infections, and working capability. Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine how the number of previous operations influenced the odds of not reaching a PASS. Results. The proportion reaching a PASS decreased from 66.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 65.4 to 66.7) in cases with no previous operation to 22.0% (95% CI 15.2 to 30.3) in cases with four or more previous operations (p < 0.001). The odds of not reaching a PASS were 2.1 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.2) in cases with one previous operation, 2.6 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.0) in cases with two, 4.4 (95% CI 3.4 to 5.5) in cases with three, and 6.9 (95% CI 4.5 to 10.5) in cases with four or more previous operations. The ODI raw and change scores and the secondary outcomes showed similar trends. Conclusion. We found a dose-response relationship between increasing number of previous operations and inferior outcomes among patients operated for degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. This information should be considered in the shared decision-making process prior to elective spine surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):422–430

Aims. The extended wait that most patients are now experiencing for hip and knee arthroplasty has raised questions about whether reliance on waiting time as the primary driver for prioritization is ethical, and if other additional factors should be included in determining surgical priority. Our Prioritization of THose aWaiting hip and knee ArthroplastY (PATHWAY) project will explore which perioperative factors are important to consider when prioritizing those on the waiting list for hip and knee arthroplasty, and how these factors should be weighted. The final product will include a weighted benefit score that can be used to aid in surgical prioritization for those awaiting elective primary hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods. There will be two linked work packages focusing on opinion from key stakeholders (patients and surgeons). First, an online modified Delphi process to determine a consensus set of factors that should be involved in patient prioritization. This will be performed using standard Delphi methodology consisting of multiple rounds where following initial individual rating there is feedback, discussion, and further recommendations undertaken towards eventual consensus. The second stage will then consist of a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to allow for priority setting of the factors derived from the Delphi through elicitation of weighted benefit scores. The DCE consists of several choice tasks designed to elicit stakeholder preference regarding included attributes (factors). Results. The study is co-funded by the University of Aberdeen Knowledge Exchange Commission (Ref CF10693-29) and a Chief Scientist Office (CSO) Scotland Clinical Research Fellowship which runs from 08/2021 to 08/2024 (Grant ref: CAF/21/06). Approval from the University of Aberdeen Institute of Applied Health Sciences School Ethics Review Board was granted 22/03/2022 - Reference number SERB/2021/12/2210. Conclusion. The PATHWAY project provides the first attempt to use patient and surgeon opinions to develop a unified approach to prioritization for those awaiting hip and knee arthroplasty. Development of such a tool will provide more equitable access to arthroplasty services, as well as providing a framework for developing similar approaches in other areas of healthcare delivery. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):753–758

Aims. The number of patients undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy has increased. In many countries, public hospitals have limited capacity. This has resulted in long waiting times for elective treatment and a need for supplementary private healthcare. It is uncertain whether the management of patients and the outcome of treatment are equivalent in public and private hospitals. The aim of this study was to compare the management and patient-reported outcomes among patients who underwent surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy in public and private hospitals in Norway, and to assess whether the effectiveness of the treatment was equivalent. Methods. This was a comparative study using prospectively collected data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. A total of 4,750 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy and were followed for 12 months were included. Case-mix adjustment between those managed in public and private hospitals was performed using propensity score matching. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Neck Disability Index (NDI) between baseline and 12 months postoperatively. A mean difference in improvement of the NDI score between public and private hospitals of ≤ 15 points was considered equivalent. Secondary outcome measures were a numerical rating scale for neck and arm pain and the EuroQol five-dimension three-level health questionnaire. The duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, and complications were also recorded. Results. The mean improvement from baseline to 12 months postoperatively of patients who underwent surgery in public and private hospitals was equivalent, both in the unmatched cohort (mean NDI difference between groups 3.9 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 5.6); p < 0.001) and in the matched cohort (4.0 points (95% CI 2.3 to 5.7); p < 0.001). Secondary outcomes showed similar results. The duration of surgery and length of hospital stay were significantly longer in public hospitals. Those treated in private hospitals reported significantly fewer complications in the unmatched cohort, but not in the matched cohort. Conclusion. The clinical effectiveness of surgery for degenerative cervical radiculopathy performed in public and private hospitals was equivalent 12 months after surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):64–71

Aims. The influence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) on the outcome after hip and knee arthroplasty is debated. We aimed to investigate the change in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores after hip and knee arthroplasty, comparing patients with and without MetS. Methods. From 1 May 2017 to 30 November 2019, a prospective cohort of 2,586 patients undergoing elective unilateral hip and knee arthroplasty was established in Denmark. Data from national registries and a local database were used to determine the presence of MetS. Patients’ scores on Oxford Hip Score (OHS) or Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Scale, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at baseline, three, 12, and 24 months after surgery were collected. Primary outcome was the difference between groups from baseline to 12 months in OHS and OKS. Secondary outcomes were scores of OHS and OKS at three and 24 months and EQ-5D-5L, UCLA Activity Scale, and FJS at three, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Generalized linear mixed model was applied, adjusting for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and smoking to present marginal mean and associated 95% CIs. Results. A total of 62.3% (1,611/2,586) of the cohort met the criteria for MetS. Both groups showed similar increase in mean OHS (MetS group 22.5 (95% CI 21.8 to 23.1), non-MetS group 22.1 (21.3 to 22.8); p = 0.477) and mean OKS (MetS group 18.0 (17.4 to 18.6), non-MetS group 17.8 (17.0 to 18.7); p = 0.722) at 12 months' follow-up. Between groups, similar improvements were seen for OHS and OKS at three and 24 months postoperatively and for the mean EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol-visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), UCLA Activity Scale, and FJS at every timepoint. Conclusion. Patients meeting the criteria for MetS obtain the same improvement in PROM scores as individuals without MetS up to 24 months after hip and knee arthroplasty. This is important for the clinician to take into account when assessing and advising patients with MetS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1074–1083

Aim. The primary aim of this retrospective study was to identify the incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO) following elective and trauma elbow arthroplasty. The secondary aim was to determine clinical outcomes with respect to the formation of heterotopic ossification. Patients and Methods. A total of 55 total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) (52 patients) performed between June 2007 and December 2015 were eligible for inclusion in the study (29 TEAs for primary elective arthroplasty and 26 TEAs for trauma). At review, 15 patients (17 total elbow arthroplasties) had died from unrelated causes. There were 14 men and 38 women with a mean age of 70 years (42 to 90). The median clinical follow-up was 3.6 years (1.2 to 6) and the median radiological follow-up was 3.1 years (0.5 to 7.5). Results. The overall incidence of HO was 84% (46/55). This was higher in the trauma group (96%, 25/26) compared with the elective arthroplasty group (72%, 21/29) (p = 0.027, Fisher’s exact test). Patients in the trauma group had HO of higher Brooker class. The presence of HO did not significantly affect elbow range of movement within the trauma or elective groups (elective arthroplasty, Mann–Whitney U test, p = 0.070; trauma arthroplasty, p = 0.370, Mann–Whitney U test). Conclusion. HO after total elbow arthroplasty is seen more commonly than previously reported. We have reported a significantly higher rate of HO in TEAs performed for trauma than those performed electively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:767–71