Materials and Methods: The study was conducted from 2018 to 2020 at a tertiary care teaching hospital. A total of 86 patients were treated with NPWT and their results were assessed for various parameters like reduction in wound size, discharge, infection, etc. We included patients with acute traumatic wounds as well as chronic infected wounds, and placed them in three treatment groups to receive either conventional NPWT, Indigenous NPWT and lastly NPWT with supplement TPOT.
Results: We observed a significant reduction of wound size, discharge and infection control in all three groups. The efficacy of indigenous NPWT is at par with conventional NPWT. Only six patients who had several comorbidities required flap coverage while in another four patients we could not achieve desired result due to technical limitations.
Conclusion: Indigenous NPWT with added TPOT is a very potent and cost effective method to control infection and rapid management of severe trauma seen in orthopaedic practice. It also decreases the dependency on plastic surgeons for management of such wounds.
Methods: Various themes are used to develop integrated curriculum which are basic medical science, simulation skills, clinical science, personality development, research, entrepreneurship and pre specialization. Each theme is subdivided, termed a module and its contents primarily focus on particular aspect.
Results: Knowledge, skill and attitude, embodied in themes or modules, are planted in specific way that they have horizontal as well as vertical integration. There is no boundary of various traditional disciplines in template of five years curriculum. For example, diagnosis is a theme which carries contents from medicine, surgery, orthopedics etc.
Conclusion: The blueprint introduced in this paper would help medical educators to draft integrated medical curricula for those institutions which intend to switch their medical programs from traditional to integrated one.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective telephonic structured interview-based study was carried out on all orthopaedic patients taking DAMA during a one-year period from July 2016 to June 2017. They were telephonically interviewed with a structured questionnaire. Hospital and ED records were analysed for demographic as well as temporal characteristics.
Results: A total of 68 orthopaedic patients walked out of casualty against medical advice out of a total 775 (8.77%) orthopaedic patients presenting during the period as against 6.4% overall rate of DAMA for all specialties. The main reasons for DAMA were financial unaffordability of treatment (36.7%), preference for another orthopaedic surgeon (22%) and on advice of the patient's General Practitioner (16.1%).
Conclusion: Unaffordability of treatment is a significant cause for walkouts amongst orthopaedic patients. Private hospitals need to recognise and implement processes by which these patients can be treated at affordable costs and with coverage either by medical insurance or robust charity programs. Patient education and awareness are important to encourage them to have insurance coverage.
Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data comparing patient numbers pre-COVID-19, and prospectively during the early COVID-19 pandemic. We have collected the numbers and nature of outpatient orthopaedic attendances to fracture clinics and elective services, inpatient admissions and the number of fracture neck of femur operations performed.
Results: The number of outpatient attendances for a musculoskeletal complaint to Accident and Emergency and the number of virtual fracture clinic reviews reduced by almost 50% during COVID-19. The number of face-to-face fracture clinic follow-ups decreased by around 67%, with a five-fold increase in telephone consultations. Inpatient admissions decreased by 33%, but the average number of fracture neck of femur operations performed has increased by 20% during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 levels.
Conclusion: We have noted a decrease in some aspects of the trauma and orthopaedic outpatient workload, such as leisure and occupational-related injuries but an increase in others, such as fracture neck of femurs. Many injuries have significantly reduced in numbers and we consider that a model could be developed for treating these injuries away from the acute hospital site entirely, thereby allowing the acute team to focus more appropriate major trauma injuries.
Methods: A total of 93 patients with American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II having lower limb orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia were randomised into two groups that received either Volulyte (n = 47) or Gelaspan (n = 46). Before the spinal anaesthesia, these patients were pre-loaded with 500 mL of the fluid of their respective group. Blood samples were taken before pre-loading and again after spinal anaesthesia and sent for venous blood gas and electrolyte level measurement. Baseline and intraoperative records of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and the requirement of ephedrine to treat hypotension were also recorded.
Results: Both fluids could not prevent significant reductions in SBP (P = 0.011), DBP (P = 0.002) and MAP (P = 0.001). There was also significant reduction in HR over time (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of ephedrine usage between both groups. Neither Volulyte 6% nor Gelaspan 4% caused significant changes in acid-base status.
Conclusion: The use of 500 mL of either Gelaspan 4% or Volulyte 6% as pre-loading fluids did not significantly prevent the incidence of post-spinal anaesthesia hypotension following orthopaedic lower limb surgery; however, both were useful in the maintenance normal acid-base balance.