The Golden Patient Initiative: A Systematic Review.

Operating theatres and surgical resource consumption comprise a significant proportion of healthcare costs. Inefficiencies in theatre lists remain an important focus for cost management, along with reducing patient morbidity and mortality. With the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the number of patients on theatre waiting lists has surged. Hence, there is a pressing need to utilise the already limited theatre time and fraught resources with innovative methods. In this systematic review, we discuss the Golden Patient Initiative (GPI), in which the first patient on the operating list is pre-assessed the day prior to surgery, and we aim to assess its impact and overall efficacy. A literature search using the following four databases was conducted to identify and select all clinical research concerning the GPI: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and the Cochrane library. Two independent authors screened articles against the eligibility criteria, using a process adapted from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data extracted included outcomes measured, follow-up period, and study design. The results showed significant heterogeneity, and hence a narrative review was conducted; 13 of the 73 eligible articles were included for analysis. Outcomes included delay in theatre start time, number of surgical case cancellations, and changes to total case numbers. Across the studies, a 19-30-minute improvement in theatre start time was reported (p<0.05), as well as a statistically significant decrease in case cancellations. Our analysis provides encouraging conclusions with regard to greater theatre efficiency following the application of GPI, a low-cost solution that can easily be implemented to help improve patient safety and lead to cost savings. However, at present, it is largely implemented among local trusts, and hence larger multi-centre studies are required to gather conclusive evidence about the efficacy of the initiative.

Orthopaedics and the gender pay gap: A systematic review.

AIMS: Gender pay gaps are present in a wide range of industries, with the medical profession being no exception. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse the peer-reviewed literature to identify whether there is a gender pay gap in orthopaedics. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching the following databases: MEDLINE, Health & Medical Collection, Nursing & Allied Health Database, Publicly Available Content Database, Consumer Health Database and Healthcare Administration Database. Original research papers pertaining to the earnings of male and female orthopaedic surgeons were included for review. RESULTS: Of 745 papers acquired through the database search, 12 were eligible for inclusion. These were published in the USA, Canada and Taiwan. 6 looked at the relationship between sex and annual income, 4 studied industry payments, one analysed hourly earnings and one compared payments per case between males and females. Men were found to earn significantly higher annual incomes than women, even when confounding factors such as rank, practice setting and subspeciality were accounted for. Men also receive significantly higher payments from industry, and earn more per hour than women. CONCLUSION: This systematic review has demonstrated that there is a gender pay gap in orthopaedics, with women commonly earning significantly less than their male colleagues. The reasons for this, however, remain unclear, and deserve further investigation. It is incumbent upon orthopaedic departments, healthcare providers and orthopaedic associations to raise awareness and ensure that men and women are paid the same for equal work.

Trapeziectomy with Ligament Reconstruction and Tendon Interposition versus Trapeziometacarpal Joint Replacement for Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background The trapeziometacarpal articulation in the thumb is a joint that is second-most commonly affected by osteoarthritis, and this can lead to considerable hand pain and disability. Currently, there is a multiplicity of surgical options available to address this problem, yet none has proven to be significantly superior to the others. Objective This study aims to compare the outcome of trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition versus trapeziometacarpal joint replacement for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. Materials and Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards. The NICE Healthcare Databases Advanced Search (HDAS) tool was used to search articles. One randomized controlled trial (RCT), one prospective cohort study and two retrospective cohort studies were identified. Results Our results demonstrate a significant difference in the Quick Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (QDASH) score between the trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) and Joint Replacement groups with the joint replacement group exhibiting better QDASH scores than the LRTI group. We also found that those who had a joint replacement had a significantly better thumb opposition than those in the LRTI group, as demonstrated by a superior Kapandji score. However, the complication rate of joint replacement appears to be higher. Conclusion Our study reveals that while both treatment options are valid, the limited body of evidence currently available shows that joint replacement carries more risks and thus should not replace the current standard treatment of trapeziectomy with LRTI. This study highlights the need for more trials to be performed to more accurately compare the two treatment modalities. For the time being, we advocate that joint replacement is only performed by surgeons who perform this procedure regularly to reduce the risk of complications.

The prevalence and impact of gender bias and sexual discrimination in orthopaedics, and mitigating strategies.

AIMS: Gender bias and sexual discrimination (GBSD) have been widely recognized across a range of fields and are now part of the wider social consciousness. Such conduct can occur in the medical workplace, with detrimental effects on recipients. The aim of this review was to identify the prevalence and impact of GBSD in orthopaedic surgery, and to investigate interventions countering such behaviours. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline, EMCARE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library Database in April 2020, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to which we adhered. Original research papers pertaining to the prevalence and impact of GBSD, or mitigating strategies, within orthopaedics were included for review. RESULTS: Of 570 papers, 27 were eligible for inclusion. These were published between 1998 and 2020. A narrative review was performed in light of the significant heterogeneity displayed by the eligible studies. A total of 13 papers discussed the prevalence of GBSD, while 13 related to the impact of these behaviours, and six discussed mitigating strategies. GBSD was found to be common in the orthopaedic workplace, with all sources showing women to be the subjects. The impact of this includes poor workforce representation, lower salaries, and less career success, including in academia, for women in orthopaedics. Mitigating strategies in the literature are focused on providing female role models, mentors, and educational interventions. CONCLUSION: GBSD is common in orthopaedic surgery, with a substantial impact on sufferers. A small number of mitigating strategies have been tested but these are limited in their scope. As such, the orthopaedic community is obliged to participate in more thoughtful and proactive strategies that mitigate against GBSD, by improving female recruitment and retention within the specialty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1446-1456.

The prevalence and impact of gender bias and sexual discrimination in orthopaedics, and mitigating strategies.

AIMS: Gender bias and sexual discrimination (GBSD) have been widely recognized across a range of fields and are now part of the wider social consciousness. Such conduct can occur in the medical workplace, with detrimental effects on recipients. The aim of this review was to identify the prevalence and impact of GBSD in orthopaedic surgery, and to investigate interventions countering such behaviours. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline, EMCARE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library Database in April 2020, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to which we adhered. Original research papers pertaining to the prevalence and impact of GBSD, or mitigating strategies, within orthopaedics were included for review. RESULTS: Of 570 papers, 27 were eligible for inclusion. These were published between 1998 and 2020. A narrative review was performed in light of the significant heterogeneity displayed by the eligible studies. A total of 13 papers discussed the prevalence of GBSD, while 13 related to the impact of these behaviours, and six discussed mitigating strategies. GBSD was found to be common in the orthopaedic workplace, with all sources showing women to be the subjects. The impact of this includes poor workforce representation, lower salaries, and less career success, including in academia, for women in orthopaedics. Mitigating strategies in the literature are focused on providing female role models, mentors, and educational interventions. CONCLUSION: GBSD is common in orthopaedic surgery, with a substantial impact on sufferers. A small number of mitigating strategies have been tested but these are limited in their scope. As such, the orthopaedic community is obliged to participate in more thoughtful and proactive strategies that mitigate against GBSD, by improving female recruitment and retention within the specialty.

Intra-operative computed tomography in endovascular aneurysm repair.

The study objective was to evaluate the ability of computed tomography (CT) to identify technical complications intra-operatively during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Frequency of complications seen by CT and their sequelae was compared with conventional completion angiography. METHODS: We performed a systematic review that conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We considered studies reporting on the effectiveness of intra-operative CT during EVAR. RESULTS: Our literature search yielded six studies that met our criteria for inclusion. In general, these showed intra-operative CT to be superior to completion angiogram at detecting intra-operative complications during EVAR. Despite concerns regarding irradiation, the use of intra-operative CT was found to expose patients to an overall lower radiation dose, since post-operative CT angiograms were no longer required. Moreover, no adverse effect on renal function has been demonstrated as a result of the increased intra-operative contrast usage when CT is used. CONCLUSIONS: The current body of evidence suggests that intra-operative CT is superior to completion angiography at detecting clinically important EVAR complications and incurs a lower total radiation dose with no added risk of contrast-induced renal impairment. Further research directly comparing the two modalities in the same cohort is required to determine sensitivity for individual complications.

Strategies to Improve Start Time in the Operating Theatre: a Systematic Review.

Operating theatres represent a significant cost burden for healthcare providers around the world. Theatre start time is widely acknowledged as an important target for efficiency savings. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of strategies to improve start time, and questions regarding the barriers to their implementation. We conducted a systematic review of bibliographic databases to identify primary research papers assessing the effect of interventions on theatre start time. Two hundred and nine papers were found from electronic literature search with 14 being included in the final review. Financial incentives, educational approaches, system-based techniques, communication, the 'golden patient' initiative and 'the productive operating theatre' scheme have all been shown to improve start time. However, questions remain over which is the most effective, the longevity of their effects and whether the results can be extrapolated beyond the context in which they were studied. We summarise the key approaches reported in the literature and identify areas for future research. This is of use to clinicians and hospital managers seeking to improve efficiency and achieve cost savings.

Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome Following Bilateral Cemented Total Hip Replacements.

Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) is a rare, serious complication caused by neuroleptic medications. It is characterized by rigidity, hyperthermia, tachycardia, leukocytosis, and an elevated creatine kinase (CK). We present a case of a 50-year-old male who underwent bilateral total hip replacements and subsequently developed NMS. This condition is typically triggered by the sudden introduction, omission, or change in dose of a neuroleptic; in contrast with previous case reports of post-surgical NMS, however, no such trigger was identifiable for our patient. Moreover, this is the first reported case of NMS after single-stage bilateral hip arthroplasty. Consequently, by presenting this case report we hope to make clinicians aware of the possibility of NMS occurring after hip arthroplasty in any patient taking longterm neuroleptics.