Lessons learnt from the impact of COVID-19 on arthroplasty services in Hong Kong: how to prepare for the next pandemic?

Background Arthroplasty services worldwide have been significantly disrupted by the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This retrospective comparative study aimed to characterize its impact on arthroplasty services in Hong Kong. Methods From January 1 to June 30, 2020, the patients of “COVID-19 cohort” underwent elective total hip or knee replacement in Hong Kong public hospitals. The cohort was compared to the “control cohort” during the same period in 2019. Data analysis was performed to compare the two cohorts’ numbers of operations, hospital admission, orthopaedic clinic attendances, and waiting time. Results A total of 33,111 patient episodes were analyzed. During the study period, the elective arthroplasty operations and hospitalizations decreased by 53 and 54%, respectively (P < 0.05). Reductions were most drastic from February to April, with surgical volume declining by 86% (P < 0.05). The primary arthroplasty operations decreased by 91% (P < 0.05), while the revision operations remained similar. Nevertheless, 14 public hospitals continued performing elective arthroplasty for patients with semi-urgent indications, including infection, progressive bone loss, prosthesis loosening, dislocation or mechanical failure of arthroplasty, and tumor. At the institution with the highest arthroplasty surgical volume, infection (28%) was the primary reason for surgery, followed by prosthesis loosening (22%) and progressive bone loss (17%). The orthopaedic clinic attendances also decreased by 20% (P < 0.05). Increases were observed in waiting time and the total number of patients on the waiting list for elective arthroplasty. Conclusions Despite the challenges, public hospitals in Hong Kong managed to continue providing elective arthroplasty services for high-priority patients. Arthroplasty prioritization, infection control measures, and post-pandemic service planning can enhance hospital preparedness to mitigate the impact of current and future pandemics.

Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Internal Brace Augmentation: Results in 40 Consecutive Patients

Background: Medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) repair has been proven to be effective in nonprofessional overhead-throwing athletes, with faster and higher rates of return to play (RTP) than the more traditional Tommy John reconstruction. Biomechanical studies and clinical data suggest that MUCL repair augmented with a collagen-coated internal brace may be an effective treatment option in this patient population. Purpose: To evaluate the functional outcomes of young nonprofessional athletes who underwent MUCL repair with internal brace augmentation for medial elbow instability. The hypothesis was that these patients will have high rates of RTP and improved functional outcomes. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Nonprofessional overhead athletes treated with MUCL repair with internal brace augmentation between 2015 and 2017 were prospectively evaluated for a minimum of 1 year. Preoperatively, all patients had evidence of medial elbow pain caused by MUCL insufficiency, as confirmed by signal changes on magnetic resonance imaging and valgus instability on arthroscopic examination. These findings did not allow them to participate in their chosen sport or profession, and each patient had failed nonoperative treatment. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the Overhead Athlete Shoulder and Elbow Score of the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic. Complications were recorded and detailed. Results: A total of 40 nonprofessional overhead athletes were included in this study (35 men and 5 women; mean age, 17.8 years [range, 14-28 years]). The mean follow-up time was 23.8 months (range, 12-44 months). The mean postoperative Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic score was 92.6 (range, 64-100). Overall, 37 athletes (92.5%) returned to play or profession at the same level or higher at a mean time of 6.9 months (range, 2-12 months). Three patients did not RTP: 1 was limited by a concomitant medical diagnosis, and the other 2 chose not to resume athletics after the procedure but remained symptom free. Conclusion: In the nonprofessional athlete, primary MUCL repair with internal brace augmentation is a viable alternative to traditional repair techniques or reconstruction, allowing for a rapid RTP and promising functional outcomes.

Patient patronage and perspectives of traditional bone setting at an outpatient orthopaedic clinic in Northern Tanzania

Background: Much of Sub-Saharan Africa meets the rising rates of musculoskeletal injury with traditional bone setting, especially given limitations in access to allopathic orthopaedic care. Concern for the safety of bone setter practices as well as recognition of their advantages have spurred research to understand the impact of these healers on public health. Objectives: Our study investigates the role of bone setting in Tanzania through patient utilization and perspectives. Methods: We surveyed 212 patients at the outpatient orthopaedic clinic at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (KCMC) in Moshi, Tanzania. Surveys were either self-administered or physician-administered. Summary statistics were calculated using XLSTAT. Open responses were analyzed using a deductive framework method. Results: Of all surveys, 6.3% (n=13) reported utilizing traditional bone setting for their injury prior to presenting to KCMC. Of the self-administered surveys, 13.6% (n=6) reported utilizing bone setting compared to 4.3% (n=7) of the physician-ad- ministered surveys (p=0.050). Negative perceptions of bone setting were more common than positive perceptions and the main reason patients did not utilize bone setting was concern for competency (35.8%, n=67). Conclusion: Our study found lower bone setting utilization than expected considering the reliance of Tanzanians on tradi- tional care reported in the literature. This suggests patients utilizing traditional care for musculoskeletal injury are not seeking allopathic care; therefore, collaboration with bone setters could expand allopathic access to these patients. Patients were less likely to report bone setter utilization to a physician revealing the stigma of seeking traditional care, which may present an obstacle for collaboration. Keywords: Bone setting; traditional medicine; traditional practitioners; orthopaedics; trauma.