We conducted an observational radiographic study to determine the inter- and intra-observer reliability of the AO classification of fractures of the distal radius. Plain posteroanterior and lateral radiographs of 456 patients with an acute fracture of the distal radius were classified by a consultant orthopaedic hand specialist and two specialist trainees, and the k coefficient for the inter- and intra-observer reliability of the type, group and subgroup classification was calculated.

Only the type of fracture (A, B or C) was found to provide substantial intra-observer reliability (k _type 0.65). The inclusion of ‘group’ and ‘subgroup’ into the classification reduced the inter-observer reliability to fair (k_group 0.29, k_subgroup = 0.28) and the intra-observer reliability to moderate (k_group 0.53, k_subgroup 0.49). Disagreement was found to arise between specific subgroups, which may be amenable to clarification.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:818–23.

The anatomy and microstructure of the menisci allow the effective distribution of load across the knee. Meniscectomy alters the biomechanical environment and is a potent risk factor for osteoarthritis. Despite a trend towards meniscus-preserving surgery, many tears are irreparable, and many repairs fail.

Meniscal allograft transplantation has principally been carried out for pain in patients who have had a meniscectomy. Numerous case series have reported a significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes after surgery, but randomised controlled trials have not been undertaken.

It is scientifically plausible that meniscal allograft transplantation is protective of cartilage, but this has not been established clinically to date.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:590–4.

Hip fracture is a global public health problem. The National Hip Fracture Database provides a framework for service evaluation in this group of patients in the United Kingdom, but does not collect patient-reported outcome data and is unable to provide meaningful data about the recovery of quality of life.

We report one-year patient-reported outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients treated at a single major trauma centre in the United Kingdom who sustained a hip fracture between January 2012 and March 2014.

There was an initial marked decline in quality of life from baseline measured using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D). It was followed by a significant improvement to 120 days for all patients. Although their quality of life improved during the year after the fracture, it was still significantly lower than before injury irrespective of age group or cognitive impairment (mean reduction EQ-5D 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.26). There was strong evidence that quality of life was lower for patients with cognitive impairment. There was a mean reduction in EQ-5D of 0.28 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.35) in patients <  80 years of age. This difference was consistent (and fixed) throughout follow-up. Quality of life does not improve significantly during recovery from hip fracture in patients over 80 years of age (p = 0.928). Secondary measures of function showed similar trends.

Hip fracture marks a step down in the quality of life of a patient: it accounts for approximately 0.22 disability adjusted life years in the first year after fracture. This is equivalent to serious neurological conditions for which extensive funding for research and treatment is made available.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:372–82.

Trauma and orthopaedics is the largest of the surgical specialties and yet attracts a disproportionately small fraction of available national and international funding for health research. With the burden of musculoskeletal disease increasing, high-quality research is required to improve the evidence base for orthopaedic practice. Using the current research landscape in the United Kingdom as an example, but also addressing the international perspective, we highlight the issues surrounding poor levels of research funding in trauma and orthopaedics and indicate avenues for improving the impact and success of surgical musculoskeletal research.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1578–85.

The extent and depth of routine health care data are growing at an ever-increasing rate, forming huge repositories of information. These repositories can answer a vast array of questions. However, an understanding of the purpose of the dataset used and the quality of the data collected are paramount to determine the reliability of the result obtained.

This Editorial describes the importance of adherence to sound methodological principles in the reporting and publication of research using ‘big’ data, with a suggested reporting framework for future Bone & Joint Journal submissions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1575–7.

The lack of a consensus for core health outcomes that should be reported in clinical research has hampered study design and evidence synthesis. We report a United Kingdom consensus for a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of patients with a hip fracture.

We adopted a modified nominal group technique to derive consensus on 1) which outcome domains should be measured, and 2) methods of assessment. Participants reflected a diversity of perspectives and experience. They received an evidence synthesis and postal questionnaire in advance of the consensus meeting, and ranked the importance of candidate domains and the relevance and suitability of short-listed measures. During the meeting, pre-meeting source data and questionnaire responses were summarised, followed by facilitated discussion and a final plenary session. A COS was determined using a closed voting system: a 70% consensus was required.

Consensus supported a five-domain COS: mortality, pain, activities of daily living, mobility, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). Single-item measures of mortality and mobility (indoor/outdoor walking status) and a generic multi-item measure of HRQL - the EuroQoL EQ-5D - were recommended. These measures should be included as a minimum in all hip fracture trials. Other outcome measures should be added depending on the particular interventions being studied.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1016–23.

The Bone & Joint Journal provides the latest evidence to guide the clinical practice of orthopaedic surgeons. The benefits of one intervention compared with another are presented using outcome measures; some may be specific to a limb or joint and some are more general health-related quality of life measures. Readers will be familiar with many of these outcome measures and will be able to judge the relative benefits of different interventions when measured using the same outcome tool; for example, different treatments for pain in the knee measured using a particular knee score. But, how should readers compare outcomes between different clinical areas using different outcome measures? This article explores the use of standardised effect sizes.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:853–4.

We compared a new fixation system, the Targon Femoral Neck (TFN) hip screw, with the current standard treatment of cannulated screw fixation. This was a single-centre, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 years and over with either a displaced or undisplaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were eligible. The primary outcome was the risk of revision surgery within one year of fixation.

A total of 174 participants were included in the trial. The absolute reduction in risk of revision was of 4.7% (95% CI 14.2 to 22.5) in favour of the TFN hip screw (chi-squared test, p = 0.741), which was less than the pre-specified level of minimum clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures.

We found no evidence of a clinical difference in the risk of revision surgery between the TFN hip screw and cannulated screw fixation for patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:652–7.

The importance for observing the intention-to-treat approach in clinical studies is explained.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1443–4.

The variation in surgical performance, both between centres and individual surgeons, has recently been of significant political, media and public interest. Within the United Kingdom, a government agenda to increase accountability amongst surgeons has led to the online publication of ‘surgeon-level’ data. Surgeons, journalists and the public need to understand these data if they are to be useful in driving up standards of surgical care. This Editorial describes the use of Funnel Plots, which are the common means by which such data are presented, and discusses how the plots are generated.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1156–7.

Intra-operative, peri-articular injection of local anaesthesia is an increasingly popular way of controlling pain following total knee replacement. At the same time, the problems associated with allogenic blood transfusion have led to interest in alternative methods for managing blood loss after total knee replacement, including the use of auto-transfusion of fluid from the patient’s surgical drain. It is safe to combine peri-articular infiltration with auto-transfusion from the drain. We performed a randomised clinical trial to compare the concentration of local anaesthetic in the blood and in the fluid collected in the knee drain in patients having either a peri-articular injection or a femoral nerve block. Clinically relevant concentrations of local anaesthetic were found in the fluid from the drains of patients having peri-articular injections (4.92 μg/ml (sd 3.151)). However, none of the patients having femoral nerve blockade had detectable levels. None of the patients in either group had clinically relevant concentrations of local anaesthetic in their blood after re-transfusion.

The evidence from this study suggests that it is safe to use peri-articular injection in combination with auto-transfusion of blood from peri-articular drains during knee replacement surgery.

The ideal form of fixation for displaced, extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia remains controversial. In the UK, open reduction and internal fixation with locking-plates and intramedullary nailing are the two most common forms of treatment. Both techniques provide reliable fixation but both are associated with specific complications. There is little information regarding the functional recovery following either procedure.

We performed a randomised pilot trial to determine the functional outcome of 24 adult patients treated with either a locking-plate (n = 12) or an intramedullary nailing (n = 12). At six months, there was an adjusted difference of 13 points in the Disability Rating Index in favour of the intramedullary nail. However, this was not statistically significant in this pilot trial (p = 0.498). A total of seven patients required further surgery in the locking-plate group and one in the intramedullary nail group.

This study suggests that there may be clinically relevant, functional differences in patients treated with nail versus locking-plate fixation for fractures of the distal tibia and differences in related complications. Further trials are required to confirm the findings of this pilot investigation.

Rupture of the tendo Achillis is a common injury with a rising incidence. Traditionally the key question following this injury has been whether or not to operate. However a contemporary Cochrane review highlighted that the method of rehabilitation may also have an important contribution to the outcome. Since this review, various early weight-bearing rehabilitation protocols have been described. Currently evidence points to the use of early functional rehabilitation, regardless of operative or non-operative management. However, there is no consensus on which exact functional rehabilitation protocol should be used. Future research should be directed towards improving our understanding of how the different rehabilitative components interact in the tendo Achillis as it heals.

Concerns have been reported to the United Kingdom National Patient Safety Agency, warning that cementing the femoral component during hip replacement surgery for fracture of the proximal femur may increase peri-operative mortality.

The National Hip Fracture Database collects demographic and outcome data about patients with a fracture of the proximal femur from over 100 participating hospitals in the United Kingdom. We conducted a mixed effects logistic regression analysis of this dataset to determine whether peri-operative mortality was increased in patients who had undergone either hemiarthroplasty or total hip replacement using a cemented femoral component. A total of 16 496 patients from 129 hospitals were included in the analysis, which showed a small but significant adjusted survival benefit associated with cementing (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.96). Other statistically significant variables in predicting death at discharge, listed in order of magnitude of effect, were gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, age, walking accompanied outdoors and arthroplasty. Interaction terms between cementing and these other variables were sequentially added to, but did not improve, the model.

This study has not shown an increase in peri-operative mortality as a result of cementing the femoral component in patients requiring hip replacement following fracture of the proximal femur.

The poor reporting and use of statistical methods in orthopaedic papers has been widely discussed by both clinicians and statisticians. A detailed review of research published in general orthopaedic journals was undertaken to assess the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting. A representative sample of 100 papers was assessed for compliance to CONSORT and STROBE guidelines and the quality of the statistical reporting was assessed using a validated questionnaire. Overall compliance with CONSORT and STROBE guidelines in our study was 59% and 58% respectively, with very few papers fulfilling all criteria. In 37% of papers patient numbers were inadequately reported; 20% of papers introduced new statistical methods in the ‘results’ section not previously reported in the ‘methods’ section, and 23% of papers reported no measurement of error with the main outcome measure. Taken together, these issues indicate a general lack of statistical rigour and are consistent with similar reviews undertaken in a number of other scientific and clinical research disciplines. It is imperative that the orthopaedic research community strives to improve the quality of reporting; a failure to do so could seriously limit the development of future research.

The 2010 Fellows undertook a six-week journey through centres of orthopaedic excellence along the East Coast of Canada and the United States. What we learned and gained from the experience and each other is immeasurable, but five areas particularly stand out; education, research, service delivery, financial insights and professional development.

Between May 1998 and May 2007 we carried out 50 Avon patellofemoral joint replacements in 32 patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis.

There were no revisions in the first five years, giving a cumulative survival of 100% for those with a minimum follow-up of five years. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years (2.1 to 10.2). The median Oxford knee score was 30.5 (interquartile range 22.25 to 42.25). In patients with bilateral replacements the median Euroqol General health score was 50 which was significantly lower than that of 75 in those with a unilateral replacement (p = 0.047). The main complication was progression of disease, which was identified radiologically in 11 knees (22%). This highlights the need for accurate selection of patients. Our findings suggest that the Avon prosthesis survives well and gives a satisfactory functional outcome in the medium term.

We used Laser Doppler flowmetry to measure the effect on the blood flow to the femoral head/neck junction of two surgical approaches during resurfacing arthroplasty. We studied 24 hips undergoing resurfacing arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. Of these, 12 had a posterior approach and 12 a trochanteric flip approach. A Laser probe was placed under radiological control in the superolateral part of the femoral head/neck junction. The Doppler flux was measured at stages of the operation and compared with the initial flux. In both groups the main fall in blood flow occurred during the initial exposure and capsulotomy of the hip joint.

There was a greater reduction in blood flow with the posterior (40%) than with the trochanteric flip approach (11%).