Hallux valgus (HV) presents as a common forefoot deformity that causes problems with pain, mobility, footwear, and quality of life. The most common open correction used in the UK is the Scarf and Akin osteotomy, which has good clinical and radiological outcomes and high levels of patient satisfaction when used to treat a varying degrees of deformity. However, there are concerns regarding recurrence rates and long-term outcomes. Minimally invasive or percutaneous surgery (MIS) has gained popularity, offering the potential for similar clinical and radiological outcomes with reduced postoperative pain and smaller scars. Despite this, MIS techniques vary widely, hindering comparison and standardization. This review evaluates the evidence for both open Scarf and Akin osteotomy and newer-generation MIS techniques. Fourth-generation MIS emphasizes multiplanar rotational deformity correction through stable fixation. While MIS techniques show promise, their evidence mainly comprises single-surgeon case series. Comparative studies between open and MIS techniques suggest similar clinical and radiological outcomes, although MIS may offer advantages in scar length and less early postoperative pain. MIS may afford superior correction in severe deformity and lower recurrence rates due to correcting the bony deformity rather than soft-tissue correction. Recurrence remains a challenge in HV surgery, necessitating long-term follow-up and standardized outcome measures for assessment. Any comparison between the techniques requires comparative studies. Surgeons must weigh the advantages and risks of both open and MIS approaches in collaboration with patients to determine the most suitable treatment. Cite this article:
Although the importance of sound statistical principles in the design and analysis of data has gained prominence in recent years, biostatistics, the application of statistics to the analysis of biological and medical data, is still a subject which is poorly understood and often mishandled. This review introduces, in the context of orthopaedic research, the terminology and the principles involved in simple data analysis, and outlines areas of medical statistics that have gained prominence in recent years. It also lists and provides an insight into some of the more common errors that occur in published orthopaedic journals and which are frequently encountered at the review stage in papers submitted to the
We performed a systematic review of the optimal management of septic arthritis in children as recommended in the current English literature using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and reference lists of retrieved articles without date restrictions up to 31 January 2009. From 2236 citations, 227 relevant full-text articles were screened in detail; 154 papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, from which conclusions were drawn on the management of infected joints in children. Our review showed that no single investigation, including joint aspiration, is sufficiently reliable to diagnose conclusively joint infection. The roles of aspiration, arthrotomy and arthroscopy in treatment are not clear cut, and the ideal duration of antibiotic therapy is not yet fully defined. These issues are discussed. Further large-scale, multi-centre studies are needed to delineate the optimal management of paediatric septic arthritis.
Orthopaedic outcome measures are used to evaluate the effect of operative interventions. They are used for audit and research. Knowledge of these measures is becoming increasingly important with league tables comparing surgeons and hospitals being made accessible to the profession and the general public. Several types of tool are available to describe outcome after hip surgery such as generic quality-of-life questionnaires, disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaires, hip-specific outcome measures and general short-term clinical measures. We provide an overview of the outcome measures commonly used to evaluate hip interventions.
