Aims. The practice of overlapping surgery has been increasing in the delivery of orthopaedic surgery, aiming to provide efficient, high-quality care. However, there are concerns about the safety of this practice. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of a model of partially overlapping surgery that we termed ‘swing room’ in the practice of primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was carried out on patients who underwent primary THA and TKA between 2006 and 2017 in two academic centres. Cases were stratified as partially overlapping (swing room), in which the surgeon is in one operating room (OR) while the next patient is being prepared in another, or nonoverlapping surgery. The demographic details of the patients which were collected included operating time, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications within six weeks of the procedure, unplanned hospital readmissions, and unplanned reoperations. Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, chi-squared tests, and logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results. A total of 12,225 cases performed at our institution were included in the study, of which 10,596 (86.6%) were partially overlapping (swing room) and 1,629 (13.3%) were nonoverlapping. There was no significant difference in the mean age, sex, body mass index (BMI), side, and LOS between the two groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the swing room group (58.2 minutes) compared with the nonoverlapping group (62.8 minutes; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the rates of complications, readmission and reoperations (p = 0.801 and p = 0.300, respectively) after adjusting for baseline American Society of Anesthesiologists scores. Conclusion. The new ‘swing room’ model yields similar short-term outcomes without an increase in complication rates compared with routine single OR surgery in patients undergoing primary THA or TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):112–115

Aims. Dislocation remains a significant complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA), being the third leading indication for revision. We present a series of acetabular revision using a dual mobility cup (DMC) and compare this with our previous series using the posterior lip augmentation device (PLAD). Methods. A retrospective review of patients treated with either a DMC or PLAD for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA was performed. They were identified using electronic patient records (EPR). EPR data and radiographs were evaluated to determine operating time, length of stay, and the incidence of complications and recurrent dislocation postoperatively. Results. A total of 28 patients underwent revision using a DMC for dislocation following Charnley THA between 2013 and 2017. The rate of recurrent dislocation and overall complications were compared with those of a previous series of 54 patients who underwent revision for dislocation using a PLAD, between 2007 and 2013. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean distribution of sex or age between the groups. The mean operating time was 71 mins (45 to 113) for DMCs and 43 mins (21 to 84) for PLADs (p = 0.001). There were no redislocations or revisions in the DMC group at a mean follow-up of 55 months (21 to 76), compared with our previous series of PLAD which had a redislocation rate of 16% (n = 9) and an overall revision rate of 25% (n = 14, p = 0.001) at a mean follow-up of 86 months (45 to 128). Conclusion. These results indicate that DMC outperforms PLAD as a treatment for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA. This should therefore be the preferred form of treatment for these patients despite a slightly longer operating time. Work is currently ongoing to review outcomes of DMC over a longer follow-up period. PLAD should be used with caution in this patient group with preference given to acetabular revision to DMC. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):423–425

Aims. The timing of surgical fixation in spinal fractures is a contentious topic. Existing literature suggests that early stabilization leads to reduced morbidity, improved neurological outcomes, and shorter hospital stay. However, the quality of evidence is low and equivocal with regard to the safety of early fixation in the severely injured patient. This paper compares complication profiles between spinal fractures treated with early fixation and those treated with late fixation. Methods. All patients transferred to a national tertiary spinal referral centre for primary surgical fixation of unstable spinal injuries without preoperative neurological deficit between 1 July 2016 and 20 October 2017 were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected retrospectively. Patients were divided into early and late cohorts based on timing from initial trauma to first spinal operation. Early fixation was defined as within 72 hours, and late fixation beyond 72 hours. Results. In total, 86 patients underwent spinal surgery in this period. Age ranged from 16 to 88 years. Mean Injury Severity Score (ISS) was higher in the early stabilization cohort (p = 0.020). Age was the sole significant independent variable in predicting morbidity on multiple regression analysis (p < 0.003). There was no significant difference in complication rates based on timing of surgical stabilization (p = 0.398) or ISS (p = 0.482). Conclusion. Our results suggest that these patients are suitable for early appropriate care with spinal precautions and delayed definitive surgical stabilization. Earlier surgery conferred no morbidity benefit and had no impact on length of stay. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(5):627–631

Aims. Complex joint fractures of the lower extremity are often accompanied by soft-tissue swelling and are associated with prolonged hospitalization and soft-tissue complications. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of vascular impulse technology (VIT) on soft-tissue conditioning in comparison with conventional elevation. Methods. A total of 100 patients were included in this prospective, randomized, controlled monocentre study allocated to the three subgroups of dislocated ankle fracture (n = 40), pilon fracture (n = 20), and intra-articular calcaneal fracture (n = 40). Patients were randomized to the two study groups in a 1:1 ratio. The effectiveness of VIT (intervention) compared with elevation (control) was analyzed separately for the whole study population and for the three subgroups. The primary endpoint was the time from admission until operability (in days). Results. The mean length of time until operability was 8.2 days (SD 3.0) in the intervention group and 10.2 days (SD 3.7) in the control group across all three fractures groups combined (p = 0.004). An analysis of the subgroups revealed that a significant reduction in the time to operability was achieved in two of the three: with 8.6 days (SD 2.2) versus 10.6 days (SD 3.6) in ankle fractures (p = 0.043), 9.8 days (SD 4.1) versus 12.5 days (SD 5.1) in pilon fractures (p = 0.205), and 7.0 days (SD 2.6) versus 8.4 days (SD 1.5) in calcaneal fractures (p = 0.043). A lower length of stay (p = 0.007), a reduction in pain (p. preop. = 0.05; p. discharge. < 0.001) and need for narcotics (p. preop. = 0.064; p. postop. = 0.072), an increased reduction in swelling (p < 0.001), and a lower revision rate (p = 0.044) could also be seen, and a trend towards fewer complications (p = 0.216) became apparent. Conclusion. Compared with elevation, VIT results in a significant reduction in the time to achieve operability in complex joint fractures of the lower limb. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):746–754

Aims. The primary aim was to assess the independent influence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on 30-day mortality for patients with a hip fracture. The secondary aims were to determine whether: 1) there were clinical predictors of COVID-19 status; and 2) whether social lockdown influenced the incidence and epidemiology of hip fractures. Methods. A national multicentre retrospective study was conducted of all patients presenting to six trauma centres or units with a hip fracture over a 46-day period (23 days pre- and 23 days post-lockdown). Patient demographics, type of residence, place of injury, presentation blood tests, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, time to surgery, operation, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, anaesthetic, length of stay, COVID-19 status, and 30-day mortality were recorded. Results. Of 317 patients with acute hip fracture, 27 (8.5%) had a positive COVID-19 test. Only seven (26%) had suggestive symptoms on admission. COVID-19-positive patients had a significantly lower 30-day survival compared to those without COVID-19 (64.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 45.7 to 83.3 vs 91.7%, 95% CI 88.2 to 94.8; p < 0.001). COVID-19 was independently associated with increased 30-day mortality risk adjusting for: 1) age, sex, type of residence (hazard ratio (HR) 2.93; p = 0.008); 2) Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (HR 3.52; p = 0.001); and 3) ASA (HR 3.45; p = 0.004). Presentation platelet count predicted subsequent COVID-19 status; a value of < 217 × 10. 9. /l was associated with 68% area under the curve (95% CI 58 to 77; p = 0.002) and a sensitivity and specificity of 63%. A similar number of patients presented with hip fracture in the 23 days pre-lockdown (n = 160) and 23 days post-lockdown (n = 157) with no significant (all p ≥ 0.130) difference in patient demographics, residence, place of injury, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, time to surgery, ASA, or management. Conclusion. COVID-19 was independently associated with an increased 30-day mortality rate for patients with a hip fracture. Notably, most patients with hip fracture and COVID-19 lacked suggestive symptoms at presentation. Platelet count was an indicator of risk of COVID-19 infection. These findings have implications for the management of hip fractures, in particular the need for COVID-19 testing. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1219–1228

Aims. Previous studies have reported an increased risk for postoperative complications in the Medicaid population undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). These studies have not controlled for the surgeon’s practice or patient care setting. This study aims to evaluate whether patient point of entry and Medicaid status plays a role in quality outcomes and discharge disposition following THA. Methods. The electronic medical record at our institution was retrospectively reviewed for all primary, unilateral THA between January 2016 and January 2018. THA recipients were categorized as either Medicaid or non-Medicaid patients based on a visit to our institution’s Hospital Ambulatory Care Center (HACC) within the six months prior to surgery. Only patients who had been operated on by surgeons (CML, JV, JDS, RS) with at least ten Medicaid and ten non-Medicaid patients were included in the study. The patients included in this study were 56.33% female, had a mean age of 60.85 years, and had a mean BMI of 29.14. The average length of follow-up was 343.73 days. Results. A total of 426 hips in 403 patients were included in this study, with 114 Medicaid patients and 312 non-Medicaid patients. Medicaid patients had a significantly lower mean age (54.68 years (SD 12.33) vs 63.10 years (SD 12.38); p < 0.001), more likely to be black or ‘other’ race (27.19% vs 13.46% black; 26.32% vs 12.82% other; p < 0.001), and more likely to be a current smoker (19.30% vs 9.29%; p = 0.001). After adjusting for patient risk factors, there was a significant Medicaid effect on length of stay (LOS) (rate ratio 1.129, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.048 to 1.216; p = 0.001) and facility discharge (odds ratio 2.010, 95% CI 1.398 to 2.890; p < 0.001). There was no Medicaid effect on surgical time (exponentiated β coefficient 1.015, 95% CI 0.995 to 1.036; p = 0.136). There was no difference in 30-day readmission, 90-day readmission, 30-day infections, 90-day infections, and 90-day mortality between the two groups. Conclusion. After controlling for patient variables, there was a statistically significant Medicaid effect on LOS and facility discharge. These results indicate that clinically similar outcomes can be achieved for Medicaid patients; however, further work is needed on maximizing social support and preoperative patient education with a focus on successful home discharge. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):78–84

Aims. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients continue to require urgent surgery for hip fractures. However, the impact of COVID-19 on perioperative outcomes in these high-risk patients remains unknown. The objectives of this study were to establish the effects of COVID-19 on perioperative morbidity and mortality, and determine any risk factors for increased mortality in patients with COVID-19 undergoing hip fracture surgery. Methods. This multicentre cohort study included 340 COVID-19-negative patients versus 82 COVID-19-positive patients undergoing surgical treatment for hip fractures across nine NHS hospitals in Greater London, UK. Patients in both treatment groups were comparable for age, sex, body mass index, fracture configuration, and type of surgery performed. Predefined perioperative outcomes were recorded within a 30-day postoperative period. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify risk factors associated with increased risk of mortality. Results. COVID-19-positive patients had increased postoperative mortality rates (30.5% (25/82) vs 10.3% (35/340) respectively, p < 0.001) compared to COVID-19-negative patients. Risk factors for increased mortality in patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery included positive smoking status (hazard ratio (HR) 15.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.55 to 52.2; p < 0.001) and greater than three comorbidities (HR 13.5 (95% CI 2.82 to 66.0, p < 0.001). COVID-19-positive patients had increased risk of postoperative complications (89.0% (73/82) vs 35.0% (119/340) respectively; p < 0.001), more critical care unit admissions (61.0% (50/82) vs 18.2% (62/340) respectively; p < 0.001), and increased length of hospital stay (mean 13.8 days (SD 4.6) vs 6.7 days (SD 2.5) respectively; p < 0.001), compared to COVID-19-negative patients. Conclusion. Hip fracture surgery in COVID-19-positive patients was associated with increased length of hospital stay, more admissions to the critical care unit, higher risk of perioperative complications, and increased mortality rates compared to COVID-19-negative patients. Risk factors for increased mortality in patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery included positive smoking status and multiple (greater than three) comorbidities. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1136–1145

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, appropriately powered, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing internal fracture fixation and distal femoral replacement (DFR) for distal femoral fractures in older patients. Patients and Methods. Seven centres recruited patients into the study. Patients were eligible if they were greater than 65 years of age with a distal femoral fracture, and if the surgeon felt that they were suitable for either form of treatment. Outcome measures included the patients’ willingness to participate, clinicians’ willingness to recruit, rates of loss to follow-up, the ability to capture data, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation, and the main determinants of cost. The primary clinical outcome measure was the EuroQol five-dimensional index (EQ-5D) at six months following injury. Results. Of 36 patients who met the inclusion criteria, five declined to participate and eight were not recruited, leaving 23 patients to be randomized. One patient withdrew before surgery. Of the remaining patients, five (23%) withdrew during the follow-up period and six (26%) died. A 100% response rate was achieved for the EQ-5D at each follow-up point, excluding one missing datapoint at baseline. In the DFR group, the mean cost of the implant outweighed the mean cost of many other items, including theatre time, length of stay, and readmissions. For a powered RCT, a total sample size of 1400 would be required with 234 centres recruiting over three years. At six months, the EQ-5D utility index was lower in the DFR group. Conclusion. This study found that running a full-scale trial in this country would not be feasible. However, it may be feasible to undertake an international multicentre trial, and our findings provide some guidance about the power of such a study, the numbers required, and some challenges that should be anticipated and addressed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1408–1415

Aims. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of combined total joint arthroplasty (TJA) (total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed during the same admission) versus bilateral THA, bilateral TKA, single THA, and single TKA. Combined TJAs performed on the same day were compared with those staged within the same admission episode. Patients and Methods. Data from the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample recorded between 2005 and 2014 were used for this retrospective cohort study. Postoperative in-hospital complications, total costs, and discharge destination were reviewed. Logistic and linear regression were used to perform the statistical analyses. p-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results. Combined TJA was associated with increased risk of deep vein thrombosis, prosthetic joint infection, irrigation and debridement procedures, revision arthroplasty, length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital costs compared with bilateral THA, bilateral TKA, single THA, and single TKA. Combined TJA performed on separate days of the same admission showed no statistically significant differences when compared with same-day combined TJA, but trended towards decreased total costs and total complications despite increased LOS. Conclusion. Combined TJA is associated with increased in-hospital complications, LOS, and costs. We do not recommend performing combined TJA during the same hospital stay. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:573–581

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

Introduction. The primary aim of this study was to describe a baseline comparison of early knee-specific functional outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using metaphyseal sleeves with a matched cohort of patients undergoing primary TKA. The secondary aim was to compare incidence of complications and length of stay (LOS) between the two groups. Methods. Patients undergoing revision TKA for all diagnoses between 2009 and 2016 had patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected prospectively. PROMs consisted of the American Knee Society Score (AKSS) and Short-Form 12 (SF-12). The study cohort was identified retrospectively and demographics were collected. The cohort was matched to a control group of patients undergoing primary TKA. Results. Overall, 72 patients underwent revision TKA and were matched with 72 primary TKAs with a mean follow-up of 57 months (standard deviation (SD) 20 months). The only significant difference in postoperative PROMs was a worse AKSS pain score in the revision group (36 vs 44, p = 0.002); however, these patients still produced an improvement in the pain score. There was no significant difference in improvement of AKSS or SF-12 between the two groups. LOS (9.3 days vs 4.6 days) and operation time (1 hour 56 minutes vs 1 hour 7 minutes) were significantly higher in the revision group (p < 0.001). Patients undergoing revision were significantly more likely to require intraoperative lateral release and postoperative urinary catheterisation (p < 0.001). Conclusion. This matched-cohort study provides results of revision TKA using modern techniques and implants and outlines what results patients can expect to achieve using primary TKA as a control. This should be useful to clinicians counselling patients for revision TKA

Aims. Intravenous dexamethasone has been shown to reduce immediate postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty (THA), though the effects are short-lived. We aimed to assess whether two equivalent perioperative split doses were more effective than a single preoperative dose. Methods. A total of 165 patients were randomly assigned into three groups: two perioperative saline injections (Group A, placebo), a single preoperative dose of 20 mg dexamethasone and a postoperative saline injection (Group B), and two perioperative doses of 10 mg dexamethasone (Group C). Patients, surgeons, and staff collecting outcome data were blinded to allocation. The primary outcome was postoperative pain level reported on a ten-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at rest and during activity. The use of analgesic and antiemetic rescue, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), CRP and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, range of motion (ROM), length of stay (LOS), patient satisfaction, and the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in the three months postoperatively, were also compared. Results. The pain scores at rest were significantly lower in Groups B and C than in Group A on postoperative days 1 and 2. The dynamic pain scores and CRP and IL-6 levels were significantly lower for Groups B and C compared to Group A on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3. Patients in Groups B and C had a lower incidence of PONV, reduced use of analgesic and antiemetic rescue, improved ROM, shorter LOS, and reported higher satisfaction than in Group A. Patients in Group C had significantly lower dynamic pain scores and IL-6 and CRP levels on postoperative days 2 and 3, and higher ROM and satisfaction on postoperative day 3 than in Group B. No SSI or GIB occurred in any group. Conclusion. Perioperative dexamethasone provides short-term advantages in reducing pain, PONV, and inflammation, and increasing range of motion in the early postoperative period after THA. A split-dose regimen was superior to a single high dose in reducing pain and inflammation, and increasing ROM, with better patient satisfaction. Level of evidence: I. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1497–1504

Aims. The direct posterior approach with subperiosteal dissection of the paraspinal muscles from the vertebrae is considered to be the standard approach for the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). We investigated whether or not a minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) technique could offer improved results. Methods. Consecutive AIS patients treated with an MIS technique at two tertiary centres from June 2013 to March 2016 were retrospectively included. Preoperative patient deformity characteristics, perioperative parameters, power of deformity correction, and complications were studied. A total of 93 patients were included. The outcome of the first 25 patients and the latter 68 were compared as part of our safety analysis to examine the effect of the learning curve. Results. In the first 25 cases, with a mean follow-up of 5.6 years (standard deviation (SD) 0.4), the mean preoperative major Cobb angle was 57.6° (SD 9.8°) and significantly corrected to mean 15.4° (SD 5.6°, 73% curve correction). The mean preoperative T5-T12 was 26.2 (SD 12.8) and significantly increased to mean 32.9 (SD 8.3). Both frontal and sagittal plane correction was conserved two years after surgery. The rate of perioperative complications was 12% and three further complications occurred (three deep delayed infection). In the latter cases, 68 patients were included with a mean follow-up time of three years (SD 0.6). The mean preoperative major Cobb angle was 58.4° (SD 9.2°) and significantly corrected to mean 20.4° (SD 7.3°).The mean preoperative T5-T12 kyphosis was 26.6° (SD 12.8°) and was significantly increased to mean 31.4° (SD 8.3°). Both frontal and sagittal correction was conserved two years after surgery. The perioperative (30 day) complication rate was 1.4%. Two (2.9%) additional complications occurred in two patients. Conclusion. MIS for AIS is associated with a significant correction of spine deformity in the frontal and sagittal planes, together with low estimated blood loss and short length of stay. The perioperative complication rate seems to be lower compared with the standard open technique based on the literature data. The longer-term safety of MIS for AIS needs to be documented with a larger cohort and compared with the standard posterior approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):506–512

Prospective data on hip fracture from 3686 patients at a United Kingdom teaching hospital were analysed to investigate the risk factors, financial costs and outcomes associated with deep or superficial wound infections after hip fracture surgery. In 1.2% (41) of patients a deep wound infection developed, and 1.1% (39) had a superficial wound infection. A total of 57 of 80 infections (71.3%) were due to Staphylococcus aureus and 39 (48.8%) were due to MRSA. No statistically significant pre-operative risk factors were detected. Length of stay, cost of treatment and pre-discharge mortality all significantly increased with deep wound infection. The one-year mortality was 30%, and this increased to 50% in those who developed an infection (p < 0.001). A deep infection resulted in doubled operative costs, tripled investigation costs and quadrupled ward costs. MRSA infection increased costs, length of stay, and pre-discharge mortality compared with non-MRSA infection

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in 30-day outcomes between patients undergoing revision for an infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with an aseptic revision THA. Patients and Methods. This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, between 2012 and 2017, using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for patients undergoing a revision THA (27134, 27137, 27138). International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision/Tenth Revision (ICD-9-CM, ICD-10-CM) diagnosis codes for infection of an implant or device were used to identify patients undergoing an infected revision THA. CPT-27132 coupled with ICD-9-CM/ICD-10-CM codes for infection were used to identify patients undergoing a two-stage revision. A total of 13 556 patients were included; 1606 (11.8%) underwent a revision THA due to infection and there were 11 951 (88.2%) aseptic revisions. Results. Patients undergoing an infected revision had a significantly greater length of stay of more than three days (p < 0.001), higher odds of any 30-day complication (p < 0.001), readmission within 30 days (p < 0.001), 30-day reoperations (p < 0.001), and discharge to a destination other than the patient’s home (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The findings suggest the need for enhanced risk adjustment based on the indication of revision THA prior to setting prices in bundled payment models of total joint arthroplasty. This risk adjustment should be used to reduce the chance of financial disincentives in clinical practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:547–551

The COVID-19 virus is a tremendous burden for the Italian health system. The regionally-based Italian National Health System has been reorganized. Hospitals' biggest challenge was to create new intensive care unit (ICU) beds, as the existing system was insufficient to meet new demand, especially in the most affected areas. Our institution in the Milan metropolitan area of Lombardy, the epicentre of the infection, was selected as one of the three regional hub for major trauma, serving a population of more than three million people. The aims were the increase the ICU beds and the rationalization of human and structural resources available for treating COVID-19 patients. In our hub hospital, the reorganization aimed to reduce the risk of infection and to obtained resources, in terms of beds and healthcare personnel to be use in the COVID-19 emergency. Non-urgent outpatient orthopaedic activity and elective surgery was also suspended. A training programme for healthcare personnel started immediately. Orthopaedic and radiological pathways dedicated to COVID-19 patients, or with possible infection, have been established. In our orthopaedic department, we passed from 70 to 26 beds. Our goal is to treat trauma surgery's patient in the “golden 72 hours” in order to reduce the overall hospital length of stay. We applied an objective priority system to manage the flow of surgical procedures in the emergency room based on clinical outcomes and guidelines. Organizing the present to face the emergency is a challenge, but in the global plan of changes in hospital management one must also think about the near future. We reported the Milan metropolitan area orthopaedic surgery management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our decisions are not based on scientific evidence; therefore, the decision on how reorganize hospitals will likely remain in the hands of individual countries

Aims. This study investigated whether the use of tranexamic acid (TXA) decreased blood loss and transfusion related cost following surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA). . Methods. A retrospective review of patients treated with TXA during a SRA, who did not receive autologous blood (TXA group) was performed. Two comparison groups were established; the first group comprised of patients who donated their own blood pre-operatively (auto group) and the second of patients who did not donate blood pre-operatively (control). Outcomes included transfusions, post-operative haemoglobin (Hgb), complications, and length of post-operative stay. . Results. Between 2009 and 2013, 150 patients undergoing SRA were identified for inclusion: 51 in the auto, 49 in the control, and 50 in the TXA group. There were no differences in the pre-operative Hgb concentrations between groups. The mean post-operative Hgb was 11.3 g/dL (9.1 to 13.6) in the auto and TXA groups, and 10.6 g/dL (8.1 to 12.1)in the control group (p = 0.001). Accounting for cost of transfusions, administration of TXA, and length of stay, the cost per patient was $1731, $339, and $185 for the auto, control and TXA groups, respectively. . Discussion. TXA use demonstrated higher post-operative Hgb concentrations when compared with controls and decreased peri-operative costs. Take home message: Tranexamic acid safely limits allogeneic transfusion, maintains post-operative haemoglobin, and decreases direct and indirect transfusion related costs in surface replacement arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:173–8

Introduction. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and vessel loop assisted closure are two common methods used to assist with the closure of fasciotomy wounds. This retrospective review compares these two methods using a primary outcome measurement of skin graft requirement. Methods. A retrospective search was performed to identify patients who underwent fasciotomy at our institution. Patient demographics, location of the fasciotomy, type of assisted closure, injury characteristics, need for skin graft, length of stay and evidence of infection within 90 days were recorded. Results. A total of 56 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 49 underwent vessel loop closure and seven underwent NPWT assisted closure. Patients who underwent NPWT assisted closure were at higher risk for requiring skin grafting than patients who underwent vessel loop closure, with an odds ratio of 5.9 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 31.24). There was no difference in the rate of infection or length of stay between the two groups. Demographic factors such as age, gender, fracture mechanism, location of fasciotomy and presence of open fracture were not predictive of the need for skin grafting. Conclusion. This retrospective descriptive case series demonstrates an increased risk of skin grafting in patients who underwent fasciotomy and were treated with NPWT assisted wound closure. In our series, vessel loop closure was protective against the need for skin grafting. Due to the small sample size in the NPWT group, caution should be taken when generalising these results. Further research is needed to determine if NPWT assisted closure of fasciotomy wounds truly leads to an increased requirement for skin grafting, or if the vascular injury is the main risk factor

We performed a retrospective study of a departmental database to assess the efficacy of a new model of orthopaedic care on the outcome of patients with a fracture of the proximal femur. All 1578 patients admitted to a university teaching hospital with a fracture of the proximal femur between December 2007 and December 2009 were included. The allocation of Foundation doctors years 1 and 2 was restructured from individual teams covering several wards to pairs covering individual wards. No alterations were made in the numbers of doctors, their hours, out-of-hours cover, or any other aspect of standard patient care. Outcome measures comprised 30-day mortality and cause, complications and length of stay. Mortality was reduced from 11.7% to 7.6% (p = 0.007, Cox’s regression analysis); adjusted odds ratio was 1.559 (95% confidence interval 1.128 to 2.156). Reductions were seen in Clostridium difficile colitis (p = 0.017), deep wound infection (p = 0.043) and gastrointestinal haemorrhage (p = 0.033). There were no differences in any patient risk factors (except the prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), cause of death and length of stay before and after intervention. The underlying mechanisms are unclear, but may include improved efficiency and medical contact time. These findings may have implications for all specialties caring for patients on several wards, and we believe they justify a prospective trial to further assess this effect

Aims. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is gaining popularity as a treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs), especially in physiologically younger patients. While THA for osteoarthritis (OA) has demonstrated low complication rates and increased quality of life, results of THA for acute FNF are not as clear. Currently, a THA performed for FNF is included in an institutional arthroplasty bundle without adequate risk adjustment, potentially placing centres participating in fracture care at financial disadvantage. The purpose of this study is to report on perioperative complication rates after THA for FNF compared with elective THA performed for OA of the hip. Patients and Methods. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database between 2008 and 2016 was queried. Patients were identified using the THA Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code and divided into groups by diagnosis: OA in one and FNF in another. Univariate statistics were performed. Continuous variables were compared between groups using Student’s t-test, and the chi-squared test was used to compare categorical variables. Multivariate and propensity-matched logistic regression analyses were performed to control for risk factors of interest. Results. Analyses included 139 635 patients undergoing THA. OA was the indication in 135 013 cases and FNF in 4622 cases. After propensity matching, mortality within 30 days (1.8% vs 0.3%; p < 0.001) and major morbidity (24.2% vs 19%; p < 0.001) were significantly higher among FNF patients. Re-operation (3.7% vs 2.7%; p = 0.014) and re-admission (7.3% vs 5.5%; p = 0.002) were significantly higher among FNF patients. Hip fracture patients had significantly longer operative time and length of stay (LOS), and were significantly less likely to be discharged to their home. Multivariate analyses gave similar results. Conclusion. This large database study showed a higher risk of postoperative complications including mortality, major morbidity, re-operation, re-admission, prolonged operative time, increased LOS, and decreased likelihood of discharge home in patients undergoing THA for FNF compared with OA. While THA is a good option for FNF patients, there are increased costs and financial risks to centres with a joint arthroplasty bundle programme participating in fracture care. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):84–90