Search

Introduction: Current practice following injury within the United Kingdom is to receive surgery, at the institution of first contact regardless of ability to provide timely intervention and inconsiderate of neighbouring hospital resource and capacity. This can lead to a mismatch of demand and capacity, delayed surgery and stress within hospital systems, particularly with regards to elective services. We demonstrate through a multicentre, multinational study, the impact of this at scale., Methodology: ORTHOPOD data collection period was between 22/08/2022 and 16/10/2022 and consisted of two arms. Arm 1 captured orthopaedic trauma caseload and capacity in terms of sessions available per centre and patients awaiting surgery per centre per given week. Arm 2 recorded patient and injury demographics, time of decision making, outpatient and inpatient timeframes as well as time to surgery. Hand and spine cases were excluded. For this regional comparison, regional trauma networks with a minimum of four centres enroled onto the ORTHOPOD study were exclusively analysed., Results: Following analysis of 11,202 patient episodes across 30 hospitals we found no movement of any patient between hospitals to enable prompt surgery. There is no current system to move patients, between regional centres despite clear discrepancies in workload per capacity across the United Kingdom. Many patients wait for days for surgery when simple transfer to a neighbouring hospital (within 10 miles in many instances) would result in prompt care within national guidelines., Conclusion: Most trauma patients in the United Kingdom are managed exclusively at the place of first presentation, with no consideration of alternative pathways to local hospitals that may, at that time, offer increased operative capacity and a shorter waiting time. There is no oversight of trauma workload per capacity at neighbouring hospitals within a regional trauma network. This leads to a marked disparity in waiting time to surgery, and subsequently it can be inferred but not proven, poorer patient experience and outcomes. This inevitably leads to a strain on the overall trauma system and across several centres can impact on elective surgery recovery. We propose the consideration of inter-regional network collaboration, aligned with the Major Trauma System., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest - Mr William Eardley serves as the Vice-chair on the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) Trauma Committee and the Clinical lead of the NHFD of England and Wales. - Mr Alex Trompeter is a member of the BOA Trauma Committee and is the lead for the BOA Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidelines. - Ms Sharon Scott is a member of the National Clinical Reference Group for Major Trauma and Burns as well as the Best Practice Tariff for Major Trauma, (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: ORTHOPOD: Day Case Trauma is a multicentre prospective service evaluation of day-case trauma surgery across four countries. It is an epidemiological assessment of injury burden, patient pathways, theatre capacity, time to surgery and cancellation. It is the first evaluation of day-case trauma processes and system performance at nationwide scale., Methods: Data was prospectively recorded through a collaborative approach. Arm one captured weekly caseload burden and operating theatre capacity. Arm two detailed patient and injury demographics, and time to surgery for specific injury groups. Patients scheduled for surgery between 22/08/22 and 16/10/22 and operated on before 31/10/22, were included. For this analysis, hand and spine injuries were excluded., Results: Data was obtained from 86 Data Access Groups (70 in England, 2 in Wales, 10 in Scotland and 4 in Northern Ireland). After exclusions, 709 weeks worth of data representing 23,138 operative cases were analysed. Day-case trauma patients (DCTP) accounted for 29.1% of overall trauma burden and utilised 25.7% of general trauma list capacity. They were predominantly adults aged 18 to 59 (56.7%) with upper limb Injuries (65.7%). Across the four nations, the median number of day-case trauma lists (DCTL) available per week was 0 (IQR 1). 6 of 84 (7.1%) hospitals had at least five DCTLs per week. Rates of cancellation (13.2% day-case; 11.9% inpatient) and escalation to elective operating lists (9.1% day-case; 3.4% inpatient) were higher in DCTPs. For equivalent injuries, DCTPs waited longer for surgery. Distal radius and ankle fractures had median times to surgery within national recommendations: 3 days and 6 days respectively. Outpatient route to surgery was varied. Dominant pathways (>50% patients listed at that episode) in England and Wales were uncommon but the most frequently seen was listing patients in the emergency department, 16 of 80 hospitals (20%)., Conclusion: There is significant mismatch in DCTP management and resource availability. There is also considerable variation in DCTP route to surgery. Suitable DCTL patients are often managed as inpatients. Improving day-case trauma services reduces the burden on general trauma lists and this study demonstrates there is considerable scope for service and pathway development and improved patient experience., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests Mr William Eardley serves as the Vice-chair on the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) Trauma Committee. Mr Alex Trompeter is a member of the BOA Trauma Committee and is the lead for the BOA Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidelines., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose: UK guidelines recommend an HbA1c < 8.5% prior to elective surgery. Optimisation of pre-operative glycaemic control can be often difficult. Aim to correlate the effect of pre-operative HbA1c on the peri-operative complication rates and whether elective bariatric surgery should be delayed in poorly controlled diabetics., Material and Methods: Retrospective data of consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, one-anastomosis gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy during January 2014 and April 2018. Patients were categorised into group 1, non-diabetics with an HbA1c < 6.5%; group 2, well-controlled diabetics with HbA1c between 6.5 and 8.4%; and group 3, poorly controlled diabetics with HbA1c ≥ 8.5%. Primary outcome was peri-operative complication rates., Results: Group 1 (n = 978), 81.8% female, median (i.q.r.) age 44.0 (34-52) years, median (i.q.r.) BMI 42.0 (38.7-46.7); group 2 (n = 350), 66.3% female, age 51.0 (45-59) years, BMI 41.8 (37.5-46.5); and group 3 (n = 90), 60% female, age 52.0 (45-56) years and BMI 41.4(36.9-44.8). Early complication rates in each group were low, 1.0% vs 1.7% vs 1.1% (p = 0.592). Mean length of stay was 2 days across the groups (p > 0.05). There was no difference in 30-day re-admission rates between groups 2.8%, 2.9% and 3.3% (p = 0.983). At 6 months and 1 year, there was sustained and equal reduction in HbA1c in all groups (p < 0.05)., Conclusion: Patients undergoing metabolic surgery for poorly controlled diabetes achieve non-inferior peri-operative outcomes. Hence, delaying metabolic surgery in an attempt to optimise diabetic control is not justifiable., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)