Around 20% of patients who have total knee replacement find that they experience long-term pain afterwards. There is a pressing need for better treatment and management for patients who have this kind of pain but there is little evidence about how to improve care. To address this gap we are developing a complex intervention comprising a clinic to assess potential causes of a patient's long-term pain after knee replacement and onwards referral to appropriate, existing services. The Medical Research Council recommends that development of complex interventions include several stages of development and refinement and involvement of stakeholders. This study comprises the penultimate stage in the comprehensive development of this intervention. Earlier stages included a survey of current practice, focus groups with healthcare professionals, a systematic review of the literature and expert deliberation.

Healthcare professionals from diverse clinical backgrounds with experience of caring for patients with long-term pain after knee replacement were sent a study information pack. Professionals who wished to participate were asked to return their signed consent form and completed study questionnaire to the research team. Participants rated the appropriateness of different aspects of the assessment process and care pathway from 1–9 (not appropriate to very appropriate). Data were collated and a document prepared, consisting of anonymised mean appropriateness ratings and summaries of free-text comments. This document was then discussed in 4 facilitated meetings with healthcare professional held at the future trial centres. A summary report and revised care pathway was then prepared and sent to participants for further comments.

28 professionals completed the questionnaire and/or attended a meeting. Participants included surgeons, physiotherapists, nurses, pain specialists and rheumatologists. Mean appropriateness scores ranged from 6.9 to 8.4. Taking a score of 7–9 as agreement, consensus was achieved that the assessment should be performed at 3 months post-operative by an extended scope practitioner/nurse, treatment be guided by a standardised assessment of pain, and treatment individualised. There was also agreement that referrals in the care pathway to surgical review, GP and pain clinics were appropriate. Nurse-led/self-monitoring was rated lower (6.9) because of considerations about the need to ensure that patients receive appropriate support, follow-up and referral to other services.

This work demonstrates the research methods that can be used to refine the design of a complex intervention. The process and findings enable refinement of an intervention for patients with long-term pain after knee replacement. The next stage of intervention development will assess the acceptability and reliability of the assessment process, and the usability of the intervention's standard operating procedures. The intervention will then be evaluated by a larger research team in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial, starting in late 2016.

Patients report similar or better pain and function before revision hip arthroplasty than before primary arthroplasty but poorer outcomes after revision surgery. The trajectory of post-operative recovery during the first 12 months and any differences by type of surgery have received little attention. We explored the trajectories of change in pain and function after revision hip arthroplasty to 12-months post-operatively and compared them with those observed after primary hip arthroplasty.

We conducted a single-centre UK cohort study of patients undergoing primary (n = 80) or revision (n = 43) hip arthroplasty. WOMAC pain and function scores and 20-metres walking time were collected pre-operatively, at 3 and 12-months post-operatively. Multilevel regression models were used to chart and compare the trajectories of post-operative change (0–3 months and 3–12 months) between the types of surgery.

Patients undergoing primary arthroplasty had a total hip replacement (n=74) or hip resurfacing (n=6). Osteoarthritis was the indication for surgery in 92% of primary cases. Patients undergoing revision arthroplasty had revision of a total hip arthroplasty (n=37), hemiarthroplasty (n=2) or hip resurfacing (n=4). The most common indication for revision arthroplasty was aseptic loosening (n=29); the remaining indications were pain (n=4), aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion (n=4) or other reasons (n=6). Primary (87%) and revision arthroplasties (98%) were mostly commonly performed via a posterior surgical approach.

The improvements in pain and function following revision arthroplasty occurred within the first 3-months following operation (WOMAC-pain, p<0.0001; WOMAC-function, p<0.0001; timed 20-metres walk, p<0.0001) with no evidence of further change beyond this initial period (p>0.05)

While the pattern of recovery after revision arthroplasty was similar to that observed after primary arthroplasty, improvements in the first 3-months were smaller after revision compared to primary arthroplasty (p<0.0001). Patients listed for revision surgery reported lower pre-operative pain levels (p=0.03) but similar post-operative levels (p=0.268) compared to those undergoing primary surgery. At 12-months post-operation patients who underwent a revision arthroplasty had not reached the same level of function achieved by those who underwent primary arthroplasty (WOMAC-function p=0.015; Time walk p=0.004).

Patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty should be informed that the majority of their improvement will occur in the first 3-months following surgery and that the expected improvement will be less marked than that experienced following primary surgery. More research is now required to 1.) identify whether specific in-patient and post-discharge rehabilitation tailored towards patients undergoing revision arthroplasty would improve or achieve equivalent outcomes to primary surgery and 2.) whether patients who are achieving limited improvements at 3-months post-operative would benefit from more intensive rehabilitation. This will become all the more important with the increasing volume of revision surgery and the high expectations of patients who aspire to a disease-free and active life.

Around 1% of the 185,000 primary hip and knee arthroplasties performed in the UK are followed by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Although PJI affects a small percentage of patients, it is one of the most devastating complications associated with this procedure. Treatment usually involves further major surgery which can adversely affect patients' quality of life. Understanding current service provision provides valuable information needed to design and evaluate support interventions for patients. The aim of this survey was to identify usual care pathways and support in UK NHS orthopaedic centres for this population.

The 20 highestvolume UK NHS orthopaedic centresfor hip and knee arthroplasty account for 33–50% of all cases treated for prosthetic joint infection. Infection leads at each centre were invited to participate in a survey about usual care provision and support for PJI. Questions exploredfollow up time-points; use of standard outcome measures; multidisciplinary care plans; supportive in-patient care and care after treatment; and onward referrals. Survey responses were recorded on a standardised proforma. Data were entered into Excel for analysis, then reviewed and coded into categories and frequency statistics to describe categorical data. A descriptive summary was developed based on these categories.

Eleven of the highestvolume orthopaedic centres completed the survey. Follow-up of patients varied greatly across centres; some centres reviewed patients at weekly or 2 week intervals, while all centres saw patients at 6 weeks. Long-term follow-up varied across centres from 3–4 monthsto 12 monthly. Length of follow-up period varied from until the infection had cleared toindefinitely. Follow-up timepoints were only standardised in 4 out of 11 centres. Only 1 centre had a dedicated infection clinic. Advice on who patients should contact if they had concerns included the consultant, community nurse, extended scope practitioner or the ward, while 3 centres told patients to avoid calling their GP. Only half of the centres routinely used standardised outcome measures with patients with PJI. The majority of centres provided standard physiotherapy and occupational therapy (OT) to in-patients while approximately half also offered social support. Only one centre provided dedicated physiotherapy and OT on a separate infection ward. Three centres provided hospital at home or community services to patients in-between operative stages. Only 3 out of 11 centres stated they had specific multidisciplinary care plans in place for patients. Once discharged most patients were provided with physiotherapy, OT and social services if needed. Common barriersto referral included complexities of referring patients outside the hospital catchment area;lack of availability of community services, and shortage of staff including physiotherapists. Delays in rehab and social services could also be problematic.

Findings show wide variation intreatment pathways and support for patients treated for PJI, both as inpatients and in the community. Only one of the 11 centreswho participated had a dedicated infection clinic. Only one centre suggested they individualised their physiotherapy support. A number of barriers exist to referring patients on to other support services after revision surgery.

Total hip replacement (THR) is a common elective surgical procedure and can be effective for reducing chronic pain. However, waiting times for THR can be considerable, and patients often experience significant pain during this time. A pain self-management intervention may provide patients with the skills to enable them to manage their pain and its impact more effectively before surgery. However, studies of arthritis self-management programmes have faced challenges because of low recruitment rates, poor intervention uptake, and high attrition rates. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based pain self-management course for patients undergoing THR. Specific objectives were to assess trial design, ascertain recruitment and retention rates, identify barriers to participation, refine data collection methods, and evaluate uptake and patient satisfaction with the course.

Patients listed for THR in an elective orthopaedic centre Bristol, UK were sent a postal invitation about the study. Participants were randomised to attend a pain self-management course plus standard care or standard care only using a computer-generated randomisation system. The pain self-management course was delivered by Arthritis Care and consisted of two half-day group sessions prior to surgery and one full-day group session 2–4 months after surgery. A structured course evaluation questionnaire was completed by participants.

Outcomes assessment was by postal questionnaire prior to surgery and 1-month, 3-months and 6-months after surgery. Self-report resource use data were collected using a diary prior to surgery and inclusion of resource use questions in the 3-month and 6-month post-operative questionnaires. Brief telephone interviews were conducted with non-participants to explore barriers to participation.

Postal invitations were sent to 385 eligible patients and 88 patients consented to participate (23% recruitment rate). Participants had a mean age of 66 years and 65% were female. Brief interviews with 57 non-participants revealed the most common reasons for non-participation were perceptions about the intervention and difficulties in getting to the hospital for the course.

Of the 43 patients randomised to the intervention group, 28 attended the pre-operative pain self-management sessions and 11 attended the post-operative sessions. Participant satisfaction with the course was high, and patients enjoyed the group format.

Retention of participants was acceptable, with 83% completing follow-up. Questionnaire return rates were high (76–93%), with the exception of the pre-operative resource use diary (35%). Completion rates for the resource use questions varied by category and allowed for an economic perspective from the health and social care payer to be taken.

Undertaking feasibility work for a RCT is labour-intensive; however this study highlights the importance of conducting such work. Postal recruitment resulted in a low recruitment rate and brief interviews with non-participants provided valuable information on barriers to participation. Embedding collection of resource use data within questionnaires resulted in higher completion rates than using resource use diaries. While patients who attended the course gave positive feedback, attendance was low. Findings from this feasibility study enable us to design successful definitive group-based RCTs in the future.

Around 1% of total hip replacements are follow by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). There is uncertainty about best treatment method for PJI, and the most recent high quality systematic reviews in unselected patients indicates that re-infection rates following one-stage and two-stage revision arthroplasty are relatively similar. In the absence of evidence randomised controlled trials will help to identify the most clinically and cost-effective treatment for PJI. Before such trials are conducted, there is a need to establish reasons for current practice and to identify whether trials are feasible. This study aimed to deliver research that would inform trial design. Specifically, we aimed to characterise consultant orthopaedic surgeons' decisions about performing either one-stage or two-stage exchange arthroplasty for patients with PJI after hip replacement and to identify whether a randomised trial comparing one-stage with two-stage revision would be possible.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 consultant surgeons from 5 high-volume National Health Service (NHS) orthopaedic departments in the UK. Surgeons were sampled on the basis that they perform revision surgery for PJI after hip arthroplasty and final sample size was justified on the basis of thematic saturation. Surgeons were interviewed face-to-face (n=2) or via telephone (n=10). The interview study took place before design of a multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial comparing patient and clinical outcomes after one-stage or two-stage revision arthroplasty. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and analysed using a thematic approach, with 25% of transcripts independently double-coded.

Results: There is no standard surgical response to the treatment of PJI and surgeons manage a complex balance of factors when choosing a surgical strategy. These include multiple patient-related factors, their own knowledge and expertise, available infrastructure and the infecting organism. Surgeons questioned whether evidence supports the emergence of two-stage revision as a method. They described the use of loosely cemented articulating spacers as a way of managing uncertainty about best treatment method. All surgeons were supportive of a randomised trial to compare one-stage and two-stage revision surgery for PJI after hip replacement. Surgeons reported that they would put patients forward for randomisation when there was uncertainty about best treatment.

Surgeons highlighted the need for evidence to support their choice of revision. Some surgeons now use revision methods that can better address both clinical outcomes and patients' quality of life, such as loosely cemented articulating spacers. Surgeons thought that a randomised controlled trial comparing one-stage and two-stage exchange joint replacement is needed and that randomisation would be feasible. The next stage of the work was to design a multi-centre randomised controlled trial, this has been achieved and the trial is now ongoing in the UK.

Robust evidence on the effectiveness of peri-operative local anaesthetic infiltration (LAI) is required before it is incorporated into the pain management regimen for patients receiving total knee replacement (TKR). To assess the effectiveness of peri-operative LAI for pain management in patients receiving TKR we conducted a systematic review, fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) and economic evaluation.

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for RCTs of peri-operative LAI in patients receiving TKR. Two reviewers screened abstracts and extracted data. Outcomes were pain, opioid use, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. Authors were contacted if required. When feasible, we conducted meta-analysis with studies analysed separately if a femoral nerve block (FNB) was provided.

In the APEX RCT, we randomised 316 patients awaiting TKR to standard anaesthesia which included FNB, or to the same regimen with additional peri-operative LAI (60mls 0.25% bupivacaine plus adrenaline). Post-operatively, all patients received patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was joint pain severity (WOMAC-Pain) at 12 months. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to allocation.

Within APEX, cost-effectiveness was assessed from the health and social-care perspective in relation to quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and WOMAC-Pain at 12-months. Resource use was collected from hospital records and patient questionnaires.

In the systematic review, 23 studies including 1,439 patients were identified. Compared with patients receiving no intervention, LAI reduced WOMAC-Pain by standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.40 (95%CI −0.58, −0.22; p<0.001) at 24 hours at rest and by SMD −0.27 (95%CI −0.50, −0.05; p=0.018) at 48 hours during activity. In three studies there was no difference in pain at any time point between randomised groups where all patients received FNB. Patients receiving LAI spent fewer days in hospital, used less opioids and mobilised earlier. Complications were similar between groups. Few studies reported long-term outcomes.

In the APEX RCT, pain levels in hospital were broadly similar between groups. Overall opioid use was similar between groups. Time to mobilisation and discharge were largely dependent on local protocols and did not differ between groups. There were no differences in pain outcomes between groups at 12 months.

In the economic evaluation, LAI was marginally associated with lower costs. Using the NICE £20,000 per QALY threshold, the incremental net monetary benefit was £264 (95%CI, −£710, £1,238) and the probability of being cost-effective was 62%.

Although LAI appeared to have some benefit for reduced pain in hospital after TKR there was no evidence of pain control additional to that provided by femoral nerve block, however it would be cost-effective at the current NICE thresholds.

Robust evidence on the effectiveness of peri-operative local anaesthetic infiltration (LAI) is required before it is incorporated into the pain management regimen for patients receiving total hip replacement (THR). We assessed the effectiveness of LAI using a systematic review and a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) with economic evaluation.

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for RCTs of peri-operative LAI in patients receiving THR. Two reviewers screened abstracts, extracted data, and liaised with authors. Outcomes were pain, opioid use, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. If feasible, we conducted meta-analysis.

In the APEX RCT, we randomised 322 patients awaiting THR to receive additional peri-operative LAI (60mls 0.25% bupivacaine plus adrenaline) or standard anaesthesia alone. Post-operatively, all patients received patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was joint pain severity (WOMAC-Pain) at 12 months. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to allocation.

Within APEX, cost-effectiveness was assessed from the health and social-care perspective in relation to quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and WOMAC-Pain at 12-months. Resource use was collected from hospital records and patient questionnaires.

In the systematic review, we identified 13 studies (909 patients). Patients undergoing THR receiving LAI experienced greater pain reduction at 24 hours at rest, standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.61 (95%CI −1.05, −0.16; p=0.008) and at 48 hours during activity, SMD −0.43 (95%CI −0.78, −0.09; p=0.014). Patients receiving LAI spent fewer days in hospital, used less opioids and mobilised earlier. Complications were similar between groups. Long-term outcomes were not a focus of these studies.

In the APEX RCT, pain levels in hospital were broadly similar between groups, probably due to patient-controlled analgesia. Opioid use was similar between groups. Time to mobilisation and discharge were largely dependent on local protocols and did not differ between groups. Patients receiving LAI were less likely to report severe pain at 12 months than those receiving standard care, odds ratio 10.2 (95%CI 2.1, 49.6; p=0.004). Complications were similar between groups.

In the economic evaluation, LAI was associated with lower costs and greater cost-effectiveness than standard care. Using a £20,000 per QALY threshold, the incremental net monetary benefit was £1,125 (95%CI £183, £2,067) and the probability of being cost-effective was greater than 98 %.

The evidence suggests that peri-operative LAI is a cost-effective intervention for reducing acute and chronic post-surgical pain after THR.

Aims

Meningococcal septicaemia can result in growth arrest and angular deformities. The aim of this case series was to review the pattern of involvement in the lower leg.

This study retrospectively reviews all forearm lengthenings carried out by the author in order to assess results and complications and determine the efficacy of this treatment in children with various pathologies. The records of all patients who had undergone a forearm lengthening between 1995 and 2009 were reviewed. 23 forearm lengthenings in 20 patients were identified but in one case there was insufficient information for the study. The study is therefore based on 22 lengthenings. The patients were divided into two groups, Group A in whom the purpose of treatment was to restore the length relationship between the radius and ulna and Group B in whom the purpose was to gain forearm length. In Group A patients the aim was to protect the radial head against dislocation by lengthening the ulna (with if necessary a corrective radial osteotomy) or to protect the wrist from subluxation by a radial lengthening. In Group B patients the aim was to improve function and cosmesis.

The average age of the patients at time of surgery was 9.78 years, average follow up was 26 months post frame removal. There were 11 patients in Group A with an average radio ulnar discrepancy of 2.34 cms and 11 patients in Group B. In Group A patients the average length achieved was 2.69 cms i.e. overcorrection and in Group B the average lengthening was 3.84 cms. In Group A patients lengthening was only partially successful at preventing subluxation or dislocation of the radial head. Common complications were pin site infection and poor regenerate formation. Forearm lengthening by distraction osteogenesis is a worthwhile procedure in paediatric patients with improved cosmesis and function particularly in Group B patients.

Introduction

We report 3 cases from different centres of infantile tibia vara in which the deformity was due to slippage of the proximal tibial epiphysis on the metaphysis; the aim of this study was to define the features of this previously unreported condition, and their implications for management.

PURPOSE

To report the experience and evolution of treatment of Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the Tibia in a single surgeon, consecutive series of 19 patients.

The Quebec Task Force defined whiplash as “an acceleration–deceleration mechanism of energy transfer to the neck”. It is logical that the lower the velocity change following impact, the lower the risk of injury. The accepted velocity change (delta-v) for whiplash injuries following rear impact has been quoted as 5 mph. There is some debate as whether this is valid in the clinical setting. We aimed to investigate this further.

A series of low speed controlled crash simulations were undertaken. There were a total of 27 runs on 23 individuals. Accelerometers were placed on the head and chest of the volunteers. Video recordings were analysed to assess relative displacement of the head and chest. The presence of symptoms was documented over a period of 7 days. The volunteers consisted of 23 males and 1 female with an average age of 38 (range 20–56). The average delta-v achieved was 2.3 mph (range 1.8–3.1 mph). The average maximum accelerations recorded were 3.46g at the chest and 2.93g at the head. The average difference was 0.53g. There was no significant displacement between the head and body. No symptoms were reported beyond 1 hour.

Whiplash is triggered if the disparity between movements of the head and neck is of sufficient magnitude. It seems logical that there is a threshold below which whiplash will not occur. Our results have shown that below a delta-v of 3 mph there is little difference in the magnitude and timing of the movements of the head and chest.

Therefore the whiplash mechanism of injury does not occur at these changes of velocity.

Lumbar facet joint pain cannot be reliably diagnosed clinically, the International Spinal Injection Society recommends two diagnostic local anaesthetic blocks before radiofrequency (RF) denervation [1].

Scoring systems may improve diagnostic accuracy. The two most popular scores disagree on the interpretation of pain induced by extension/rotation:

‘Cochin Criteria’ [2]: pain on extension/rotation _ not facet joint problem

Helbig & Lee [3]: pain on extension/rotation _ facet joint problem

Methods: Retrospective study of all patients who had RF denervations of the lumbar facet joints in 2004.

Patients were selected clinically and did not undergo diagnostic blocks.

Cochin criteria, Helbig & Lee scores, work status, and outcome were taken from the case notes.

Likelihood ratios were calculated for the scores, their individual components, and work status.

Results: 145 patients underwent RF facet joint denervation, for 127 all data was available. In 68 patients the procedure was successful (53.5%).

Conclusion: Neither the Cochin Criteria nor the Helbig & Lee score can predict the response to radiofrequency denervation of the lumbar facet joints.

Pain on extension/rotation weakly indicates a poor response to facet joint denervation.

X-rays do not help with the diagnosis.

Social factors may be more important than clinical signs.

Aim: Severity of knee osteoarthritis (OA) can be defined clinically, radiologically, or pathologically. The Système Française D’Arthroscopie (SFA) is a validated method of grading and scoring the severity of changes on the articular surface as observed through the arthroscope. We have validated a modification of the SFA system for use with digital photographs of pathological samples.

Material and Method: After Ethics Committee approval, both tibial plateaux and femoral condyles were collected from 84 patients undergoing total knee replacement or at post mortem. Extent and grading of cartilage changes were documented for the 4 compartments of each sample on a diagram using direct visualisation and probing (Pathological Scores). In addition, each sample was digitally photographed at standard magnification and illumination, archived, graded and scored (Photographic Scores). A second observer (AY) also graded and scored photographic images for 72 compartments of the first 18 cases.

Data analysis: Repeatability was measured as Repeatability Coefficients (Bland and Altman, Lancet1986; 1; 307–10). 95% of the differences between 2 measurements of a case are expected to fall within the Repeatability Coefficient. Associations between compartments are expressed as Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results: For each of the 4 compartments studied, scores ranged from -2.2 to +717.8, representing the full range of possible scores. Allocation of scores to diagrams was highly repeatable (Repeatability Coefficient = 50). There was good agreement between Pathological and Photographic Scores (Repeatability Coefficient = 88). There was moderate agreement between Photographic Scores allocated by the 2 observers, with greatest agreement for low (< 200) and high (> 500) scores. Scores for each compartment correlated with scores for each of the other 3 compartments (R values 0.7 to 0.9, all P < 0.005).

Conclusion: Our modified SFA system permits scoring of OA severity using digital photographs of pathological samples. Our data support the view that OA affects the entire joint, and that a single compartment (e.g. medial tibial plateau) can be taken as broadly representative of the tibiofemoral joint as a whole.

Aim: The Système Française D’Arthroscopie (SFA) is a validated method of arthroscopic grading and scoring the knee OA. We have validated a modification of the SFA system for use with digital photographs of pathological samples.

Material and Method: After Ethics Committee approval, both tibial plateaux and femoral condyles were collected from 84 patients undergoing total knee replacement or at post mortem. Extent and grading of cartilage changes were documented for the 4 compartments of each sample on a diagram using photographs at standard magnification and illumination, archived, (Photographic Scores). Validation obtained by direct visualisation and probing (Pathological Scores). Radiographic and Histological scoring In addition, each sample was digitally. A second observer (AY) also graded and scored photographic images for 72 compartments of the first 18 cases.

Results: For each of the 4 compartments studied, scores ranged from -2.2 to +717.8, representing the full range of possible scores. A statistically significant correlation observed in the study between radiological variables and the severity of chondropathy assessed by our (SFA-path) [ P < 0.005] suggests satisfactory extrinsic validity of this scoring system. And statistically significant correlation [p> 0.0001] between the SFA Path scores of the medial compartment tibial plateau OA and Histologi-cal grade [Minkin] of the same samples. Allocation of scores to diagrams was highly repeatable (Repeatability Coefficient = 50). There was good agreement between Pathological and Photographic Scores (Repeatability Coefficient = 88). There was moderate agreement between Photographic Scores allocated by the 2 observers, with greatest agreement for low (< 200) and high (> 500) scores. Scores for each compartment correlated with scores for each of the other 3 compartments (R values 0.7 to 0.9, all P < 0.005).

Conclusion: We validated our modified SFA system which permits scoring of OA severity using digital photographs of pathological samples. SFApath is reliable and repeatable scoring system Our data support the view that OA affects the entire joint, and that a single compartment (e.g. medial tibial plateau) can be taken as broadly representative of the tibiofemoral joint as a whole.

Purpose: There are numerous papers from specialist arthroplasty centres outlining results of total knee arthroplasties but little information from outside these major centres. We carried out a review of a fixed bearing total condylar knee replacement used in Dunedin by a variety of surgeons for over 10 years.

Method: All patients who received a Duracon/PCA fixed bearing total knee replacement between 1992 and 1996 were assessed clinically, fluoroscopically and completed an SF12, WOMAC and IKSS questionnaire.

Results: At a mean 9.7 (8–12) years follow up, 126 (69.6%) patients were available for review and 46 (25%) were deceased. The average age was 72 years (52–88) and the primary diagnosis was osteoarthritis in 95% of the cases. There were 34% Charnley Grade A, 37% Grade B and 29% Grade C respectively.

The average IKS Knee score was 72 (23–97) and the functional score was 68 (0–100) with 74% experiencing none or only mild pain. The SF12 assessment revealed a mean physical score of 55 (14–99). Ninety per cent of patients were satisfied with their knee and 89% would have the operation again if required.

There was one operative death (PE), one deep infection, 3 PE’s, 3 DVT’s and 5 superficial infections. An MUA was required in 9 cases.

Eight knees were revised. Using ‘all revisions’ as an end point. The survival rate was 95.3% at 10 years.

Conclusion: These results suggest that knee replacements carried out outside specialist arthroplasty centres perform very well with a survival rate of the implant of 95% at 10 years.

Normal acetabular development in developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) depends upon early and maintained congruent reduction. Computed tomography is an accepted method for evaluating this and attempts to quantify hip reduction, by various angular and linear measurements, have been reported.

The aim of this study was to assess initial CT scans, following open reduction in the older child with DDH, with comparison of outcome to evaluate prognostic value.

Method: Thirty consecutive patients underwent open reduction for DDH, with a mean age of 25.9 months at the time of operation. Acetabular morphology and the position of the femoral head were evaluated on the initial CT scan, taken on the first postoperative day, and AP pelvic radiograph taken at the latest follow-up.

Results: The acetabulae of the dislocated hips were found to be significantly more anteverted than the normal. The dislocated hips also had significantly increased lateral displacement both initially and at latest follow-up. Posterior displacement of the proximal femoral metaphysis should raise concern due to an association with the need for further surgical intervention. These results did not however correlate with outcome.

In conclusion, despite the significant differences noted between DDH and normal hips they did not predict acetabular development or persistent acetabular dysplasia.

Introduction and Aims: The aim was to prospectively assess shoulder hemiarthroplasty for un-reconstructable proximal humeral fractures at a minimum of 12 months and identify factors that aid prognosis.

Method: Inclusion criteria were patients with a displaced fracture requiring shoulder hemiarthroplasty. Constant scoring was done at a minimum follow-up of one year. Patients were treated using a Neer or Osteonics prosthesis, the decision for hemiarthroplasty being made at the time of surgery. Post-operative management was standardised. An independent functional assessment, record review establishing a physiological index according to co-morbidities, and radiological analysis were carried out. Survival analysis was performed for one and five-year results and data was analysed by linear regression to identify prognostic factors.

Results: From 163 patients there were 138 fitting the criteria, 42 males and 96 females, average age of 68.5 (range 30–90) years and follow-up of 6.3 (range 1–15) years. The fracture pattern was three and four part in 133 cases and five head split fractures; 58 were associated with dislocation. Survival was 96.4 percent at one year and 93.6 percent at five years, with no significant difference between prostheses. There were eight revisions, (one deep infection, four dislocations and three peri-prosthetic fractures), by 12 months. The average Constant score was 67.1 at one year.

Conclusion: Prognostic factors on presentation were age of the patient and their physiological index, and at three months any complication, the position of the implant, tuberosity union and persistent neurological deficit. Overall optimum outcome was in patients aged 55 to 60, with minimal co-morbidities and uncomplicated recovery.

Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the time to union following acute shortening and subsequent lengthening versus Bone Transport using the Ilizarov external fixator.

Methods Eighteen patients with tibial non-unions (age range 26 to 63 years) were recruited between March 1995 and September 2001. Three subgroups of six patients each, were formed. Group 1 underwent Acute Shortening and subsequent Lengthening, whereas Group 2 underwent Bone Transport. Group 3 patients had defects < 1 cms but were still high energy injuries, therefore underwent application of a frame. This group was used as a comparison group. A proximal corticotomy was used for distraction osteogenesis. Bone grafting at the fracture or regenerate site was used if required to aid healing. All patients were followed-up to union. All three groups were similar for age, pre-injury health status including cigarette smoking. Ten infected non-unions were present. Most patients had at least two conventional operative interventions prior to referral to us for Ilizarov surgery. The mean bone resection in the Acute Shortening group (Group 1) was 4.6 cms and in the Bone Transport group (Group 2) was 5.9 cms. Patients in Group 2 had more procedures done before union was achieved. This included adjustment of frame/ reinsertion of wires to align transport segment for optimal docking and bone grafting at the docking/regenerate site. Four patients in Group 2 required bone grafting at the docking site compared to none in Group 1.

Results Eradication of infection and union was achieved in all patients with average time in frame being 12.1 months in the Acute Shortening group, 17.2 months in the Bone Transport group and 8.0 months in the Frame stabilisation group. Using Paley’s bone result evaluation system, an excellent result was achieved in all patients of all groups. However, patients in the Acute Shortening group had a shorter time to union and needed fewer procedures.

Conclusions We recommended that where feasible, acute shortening and lengthening is preferable to bone transport due to shorter union time and fewer procedures undertaken to achieve union. If this is not possible due to large defects, then a combination of acute shortening with transport to bridge the gap should be considered.