Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose The management of meniscal tears is a widely researched and evolving field. Previous studies reporting the incidence of meniscal tears are outdated and not representative of current practice. The aim of this study was to report the current incidence of MRI confirmed meniscal tears in patients with a symptomatic knee and the current intervention rate in a large NHS trust. Methods Radiology reports from 13,358 consecutive magnetic resonance imaging scans between 2015 and 2017, performed at a large UK hospital serving a population of 470,000, were assessed to identify patients with meniscal tears. The hospital database was interrogated to explore the subsequent treatment undertaken by the patient. A linear regression model was used to identify if any factors predicted subsequent arthroscopy. Results 1737 patients with isolated meniscal tears were identified in patients undergoing an MRI for knee pain, suggesting a rate of 222 MRI confirmed tears per 100,000 of the population aged 18 to 55 years old. 47% attended outpatient appointments and 22% underwent arthroscopy. Root tears [odds ratio (95% CI) 2.24 (1.0, 4.49); p  = 0.049] and bucket handle tears were significantly associated with subsequent surgery, with no difference between the other types of tears. The presence of chondral changes did not significantly affect the rate of surgery [0.81 (0.60, 1.08); n.s]. Conclusion Meniscal tears were found to be more common than previously described. However, less than half present to secondary care and only 22% undergo arthroscopy. These findings should inform future study design and recruitment strategies. In agreement with previous literature, bucket handle tears and root tears were significant predictors of subsequent surgery. Level of evidence III.

A substantial challenge facing multicentre audit and research projects is timely recruitment of collaborators and their study centres. Cost-effective strategies are required and fee-free social media has previously been identified as a potential conduit. We investigated and evaluated the effectiveness of a novel multi-format social media and Internet strategy for targeted recruitment to a national multicentre cohort study. Interventions involved a new Twitter account, including weekly live question-and-answer sessions, a new Facebook group page, online YouTube presentations and an information page on a national association website. Link tracking analysis was undertaken using Google Analytics, which was then related to subsequent registration. Social influence was calculated using the proprietary Klout score. Internet traffic analysis identified a total of 1562 unique registration site views, of which 285 originated from social media (18.2%). Some 528 unique registrations were received, with 96 via social media platforms (18.2%). Traffic source analysis identified a separate national association webpage as resulting in the majority of registration page views (15.8%), followed by Facebook (11.9%), Twitter (4.8%) and YouTube (1.5%). A combination of publicity through Facebook, Twitter and the dedicated national association webpage contributed to the greatest rise in registration traffic and accounted for 312 (48%) of the total registrations within a 2-week period. A Twitter 'social influence' (Klout) score of 42/100 was obtained during this period. Targeted social media substantially aided study dissemination and collaborator recruitment. It acted as an adjunct to traditional methods, accounting for 18.2% of collaborator registration in a short time period with no associated financial costs. We provide a practical model for designing future recruitment campaigns, and recommend Facebook, Twitter and targeted websites as the most effective adjuncts for maximising cost-effective study recruitment.

ObjectivesTo explore people’s views of recovery from total knee replacement (TKR) and which recovery domains they felt were important.DesignSemi-structured interviews exploring the views of individuals about to undergo or who have undergone TKR. A constant-comparative approach with thematic analysis was used to identify themes. The process of sampling, collecting data and analysis were continuous and iterative throughout the study, with interviews ceasing once thematic saturation was achieved.SettingTertiary care centre.ParticipantsA purposive sample was used to account for variables including pre, early or late postoperative status.Results12 participants were interviewed, 4 who were preoperative, 4 early postoperative and 4 late postoperative. Themes of pain, function, fear of complications, awareness of the artificial knee joint and return to work were identified. Subthemes of balancing acute and chronic pain were identified.ConclusionsThe results of this interview-based study identify pain and function, in particular mobility, that were universally important to those undergoing TKR. Surgeons should consider exploring these domains when taking informed consent to enhance shared decision-making. Researchers should consider these recovery domains when designing interventional studies.

ObjectivesThere is a paucity of qualitative research exploring the patient experience of living with a meniscal tear, vital to effective patient management. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and expectations of treatment of patients aged 18–55 years with a meniscal tear of the knee.DesignQualitative study involving semistructured interviews.SettingParticipants were selected from nine secondary care centres in England.Participants10 participants diagnosed with a meniscal tear were recruited from the Meniscal Tear Outcome cohort study using a purposive sampling strategy until data saturation was achieved. Semistructured interviews were conducted between April and May 2021 and thematic analysis was used to identify key patient experiences.ResultsThemes identified relate to the broad areas of symptoms, clinical consultation and experience of treatment. Meniscal tears have a profound impact on pain and many patients experience effects on their family and financial life in addition to physical symptoms. Participants expected most of their management to occur in secondary care and most thought surgery would be a definitive treatment, while they believed the effectiveness of physiotherapy could not be guaranteed as it would not fix the physical tear.ConclusionThis study is one of the first to explore patient experiences of a meniscal tear and their perceptions of treatment options. Patient experiences and perceptions are important for clinicians to understand in order to provide the best possible care. It is important to elicit these experiences, listen to the patient, discuss their perspectives and build these experiences and expectations into clinical care.Trial registration numberISRCTN11534691.

To the Editor: We read with interest \"Johnston et al.'s\" article regarding the use of an instant messaging service (WhatsApp) to improve communication within the surgical team.1 As demonstrated by the authors, application of an instant messaging platform in everyday clinical practice provides an efficient and economical alternative to the traditional pager system.

IntroductionRobotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems.Methods and analysisThe Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands—Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate.Trial registration numberISRCTN27624068.

BackgroundVirtual reality (VR) simulation is a potential solution to the barriers surgical trainees are facing. There needs to be validation for its implementation within current training. We aimed to compare VR simulation to traditional methods in acquiring surgical skills for a TFN-ADVANCED™ Proximal Femoral Nailing System (TFNA; DePuy Synthes, Auckland, New Zealand) femoral nailing system.MethodsThirty-one surgical trainees were randomised to two groups: traditional-training group (control group) and a VR-training group (intervention group) for insertion of a short cephalomedullary TFNA nail. Both groups then inserted the same TFNA system into saw-bone femurs. Surveys evaluated validity of the relevant activities, perception of simulation, confidence, stress and anxiety. The primary outcomes were tip-apex distance (TAD) and user anxiety/confidence levels. Secondary outcomes included number of screw- and nail-guidewire insertion attempts, the time taken to complete and user validity of the VR system.ResultsThere was no statistical difference in TAD between the intervention and control groups (9mm vs 15mm, p=0.0734). The only TAD at risk of cut-out was in the control group (25mm). There was no statistical difference in time taken (2547.5ss vs 2395ss, p=0.668), nail guide-wire attempts (two for both groups, p=0.355) and screw guide-wire attempts (one for both groups, p=0.702).The control group versus intervention had higher anxiety levels (50% vs 33%) and had lower confidence (61% vs 84%).InterpretationThere was no objective difference in performance on a saw-bone model between groups. However, this VR simulator resulted in more confidence and lower anxiety levels whilst performing a simulated TFNA. Whilst further studies with larger sample sizes and exploration of transfer validity to the operating theatre are required, this study does indicate potential benefits of VR within surgical training.

IntroductionThe number of robotic-assisted hip replacement procedures has expanded globally with the intended aim of improving outcomes. Intraoperative robotic-arm systems add additional costs to total hip replacement (THR) surgery but may improve surgical precision and could contribute to diminished pain and improved function. Additionally, these systems may reduce the need for expensive revision surgery. Surgery with conventional instruments may be just as successful, quick and affordable. There is timely demand for a robust evaluation of this technology.Methods and analysisThe Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial for Hips (RACER-Hip) is a multicentre (minimum of six UK sites), participant–assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial. 378 participants with hip osteoarthritis requiring THR will be randomised (1:1) to receive robotic-assisted THR, or THR using conventional surgical instruments. The primary outcome is the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months post-randomisation; a patient-reported outcome measure assessing participants’ awareness of their joint when undertaking daily activities. Secondary outcomes will be collected post-operatively (pain, blood loss and opioid usage) and at 3, 6, 12, 24 months, then 5 and 10 years postrandomisation (including function, pain, health-related quality of life, reoperations and satisfaction). Allocation concealment will be accomplished using a computer-based randomisation procedure on the day of surgery. Blinding methods include the use of sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will adhere to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statements.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by an ethics committee (Solihull Research Ethics Committee, 30 June 2021, IRAS: 295831). Participants will provide informed consent before agreeing to participate. Results will be disseminated using peer-reviewed journal publications, presentations at international conferences and through the use of social media. We will develop plans to disseminate to patients and public with our patient partners.Trial registration numberISRCTN13374625.

IntroductionMeniscal tears are a common knee injury with an incidence of 60 per 100 000. Management of meniscal tears can include either non-operative measures or operative procedures such as arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM). Despite substantial research evaluating the effectiveness of APM in the recent past, little is known about the clinical course or the experiences of patients with a meniscal tear.AimTo summarise the short to long-term patterns of variability in outcome in patients with a meniscal tear.To summarise the evidence on patient experiences of meniscal tears. In particular, we will focus on patient experiences of treatment options, treatment pathways and their views of the outcomes used in meniscal tear research.Methods and analysisTwo search strategies will be developed to identify citations from EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Sociofile. The date of our planned search is 14 August 2020. For the quantitative review we will identify studies reporting patient-reported outcome measures in patients after a meniscal tear. The standardised mean change will be used to assess the variation in size of response and summarise the overall response to each treatment option. All studies will undergo quality assessment using either the Cochrane risk of bias or the Newcastle-Ottawa tool.A qualitative systematic review will be used to identify studies reporting views and experiences of patients with a meniscal tear. All studies will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and if sufficient data are present a meta-synthesis will be performed to identify first, second and third-order constructs.Ethics and disseminationGiven the nature of this study, no formal ethical approval will be sought. Results from the review will be disseminated at national conferences and will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. Lay summaries will be freely available via the study Twitter page.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019122179.

IntroductionThe use of arthroscopy to alleviate the symptoms of osteoarthritis has been questioned by recent high quality evidence. This has led to the development of guidelines by specialist and national bodies advocating against its use.AimsTo examine the trends of the rates of arthroscopy in patients with knee osteoarthritis over the past five years and determining compliance with guidelines.MethodsMulti-centre, retrospective audit in five hospital trusts in the United Kingdom. The number of arthroscopies performed by month from 2013 to 2017 was identified through hospital coding. Fifty randomly selected records from the year 2017 were further analysed to assess compliance with NICE guidelines.ResultsBetween 2013 and 2017, the number of arthroscopies performed annually in five trusts dropped from 2028 to 1099. In the year 2017, 17.7% of patients with no mechanical symptoms and moderate-to-severe arthritis pre-operatively had arthroscopy.ConclusionKnee arthroscopy continues to be used as a treatment for osteoarthritis, against national guidelines. Whilst overall numbers are declining, further interventions, including implementation of high-quality conservative care is required to further eliminate unnecessary procedures.