RESUMO
Non-surgical, conservative approaches to foot and ankle conditions are of important consideration. Orthotics play a significant role in treating these conditions, preventing progression, and alleviating pressure on affected areas, thereby promoting normal gait. This article aims to assess the utility and effectiveness of various orthotic treatments in different clinical scenarios. We reviewed 27 peer-reviewed articles using electronic databases, employing keywords such as "orthoses," "orthotic treatment," "arthritis," "neuropathy," and "foot and ankle trauma." Studies conducted in recent decades have explored the effectiveness of orthoses in various conditions, including connective tissue disorders, tendon and ligament injuries, foot arthritis, neuropathic and inflammatory wounds, and sports-related recurrent injuries. Orthotic management has proven effective across diverse foot and ankle conditions. Integrating orthotic treatment with systemic approaches benefits patients with foot and ankle disorders. We believe this review can be utilised by clinicians in the management of foot and ankle disorders.
RESUMO
Background and aim The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on healthcare systems. Several local infection control methods were put in place, which have now evolved and continued in some form or the other. According to various research, as the time duration for distinct phases in the pathway rose, trauma theatre efficiency reduced. However, there is no literature, to our knowledge, that has explicitly looked at theatre utilisation and cost efficiency compared them and expressed theatre efficiency in these terms. The aim of this article is to study theatre efficiency in terms of utilisation and costs before and during the pandemic and understand the influence of infection control protocols on these. Materials and methods The data were collected retrospectively from the ORMIS theatre management software (iPath Softwares, Ohio), from December 2019 (pre-COVID) and December 2020 (COVID). Turnaround time, utilisation time and combined operative time were defined and compared. Costs incurred due to over-running, under-running and turnaround time were compared. Results Theatre utilization was 101% during COVID and 86.63% pre-COVID. The average cost of over-running as well as under-running a theatre list during the pandemic was significantly higher. Conclusion Optimal theatre utilisation and reduced time between cases improve theatre efficiency. Turnaround time, if reduced, can not only decrease costs but also increase efficiency.Theatre utilisation and efficiency can be maintained even with new infection control protocols, but these are not cost-efficient.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced health care delivery significantly. Numerous studies have highlighted that trauma theater efficiency has decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, there is limited information as to exactly which stage of the patient theater journey is causing this decreased efficiency and whether efficiency can be improved. In the trauma theater of Warrington Hospital, United Kingdom, we have attempted to maintain trauma theater efficiency despite the requirement for increased infection control. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of additional COVID-19 infection control protocols on trauma theater efficiency in our center, considering the length of time taken for specific theater events, and to find out whether our interventions were successful in maintaining theater efficiency. METHODS: We compared the efficiency of the trauma theater in a busy unit in December 2019 (pre-COVID-19) and December 2020 (with COVID-19 protocols in place). We collected time logs for different theater events for each patient in December of both years and compared the data. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the average number of cases performed per session between the COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 time periods (P=.17). Theater start time was significantly earlier during the COVID-19 period (P<.001). There was no significant difference between the two periods in transport time, check-in time, preprocedure time, anesthetic time, and the time between cases (P>.05). A significant difference was observed in the check-out time between the two groups in the two time periods, with checking out taking longer during the COVID-19 period (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that our theater start times were earlier during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the overall theater efficiency was maintained despite the additional COVID-19 infection control protocols that were in place. These findings suggest that well-planned infection control protocols do not need to impede trauma theater efficiency in certain settings.
RESUMO
Information technology has become an integral part of health care in the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS). All health care professionals are required to have a certain level of cyber ethics and knowledge of computers. This is assured by regular mandatory training. The government of the United Kingdom has charted out a course to strengthen cyber security and prevent any crises like Wannacry. Simple things like leaving a computer unlocked can pose a potential threat to the cyber security of the whole NHS. These cannot be addressed with money alone, as they involve complex interactions of human factors. Such seemingly simple non-compliance results often in harm to the patient or breach of confidentiality. We tried to find out the compliance among junior doctors to the Trust Information Technology (IT) Safe Usage Policy. We made interventions and interviewed junior doctors to find out the reasons for non-compliance. We re-audited in order to see if our interventions helped. We also audited compliance in another Trust independently, which showed that this problem is not specific to a particular trust. Here we suggest the changes that all Trusts can make and follow our model to audit their compliance.
RESUMO
Introduction The British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) and Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) recommend urgent MRI imaging and operative intervention in patients with suspected cauda equina syndrome (CES). Due to the lack of a 24-hour MRI service and the centralisation of neurosurgery to large tertiary centres, there is a need for an evidence-based protocol for the referral of patients presenting with back pain, with red flags to specialist tertiary neurosurgical centres. Methods The standard operating procedure (SOP) at our local hospital outlines steps in the assessment, triage and onward referral of patients presenting with symptoms of acute CES. A closed-loop audit cycle was performed; the first cycle was between September and December 2020 and the second was between January and April 2021. Recommendations made after the first cycle were actioned prior to re-audit. Results There was 100% compliance regarding discussions with neurosurgery following MRI and appropriate management following neurosurgical advice. There was a 21.1% increase in appropriate discussions with neurosurgery by the emergency department (ED), increased accurate documentation of red flags (5% anal tone and 21% perianal sensation). There was a 53% decrease in senior ED doctor referral to neurosurgery, although 100% referrals were discussed with an ED senior prior to referral, and a 20% decrease in compliance regarding neurosurgery plan documentation. Conclusion We were able to improve our compliance with several aspects of the SOP using simple measures. We could not improve one aspect of SOP, namely, a discussion with the specialist centre being performed by a senior doctor. Since CES requires timely management and early scanning, we recommend a robust protocol at the admitting hospital. This paper presents the protocol at our hospital and the rationale behind it. We discuss what affects our compliance with the SOP and how simple interventions have helped us improve.
