Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre

About: Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre is a healthcare organization based out in Oxford, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Arthroplasty. The organization has 2082 authors who have published 2920 publications receiving 145718 citations.

Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance

Abstract: Evaluating complex interventions is complicated. The Medical Research Council9s evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task. Now the council has updated its guidance

The Oswestry Disability Index.

Abstract: Study design The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) has become one of the principal condition-specific outcome measures used in the management of spinal disorders. This review is based on publications using the ODI identified from the authors' personal databases, the Science Citation Index, and hand searches of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders. Objectives To review the versions of this instrument, document methods by which it has been validated, collate data from scores found in normal and back pain populations, provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI, and maintain the ODI as a gold standard outcome measure. Summary of background data It has now been 20 years since its original publication. More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index. The authors have a large correspondence file relating to the ODI, that is cited in most of the large textbooks related to spinal disorders. Methods All the published versions of the questionnaire were identified. A systematic review of this literature was made. The various reports of validation were collated and related to a version. Results Four versions of the ODI are available in English and nine in other languages. Some published versions contain misprints, and many omit the scoring system. At least 114 studies contain usable data. These data provide both validation and standards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample populations. Conclusions The ODI remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure. The process of using the ODI is reviewed and should be the subject of further research. The receiver operating characteristics should be explored in a population with higher self-report disabilities. The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood, particularly in sensitivity to real change.

Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement

Abstract: We have developed a 12-item questionnaire for patients having a total knee replacement (TKR). We made a prospective study of 117 patients before operation and at follow-up six months later, asking them to complete the new questionnaire and the form SF36. Some also filled in the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). An orthopaedic surgeon completed the American Knee Society (AKS) clinical score. The single score derived from the new questionnaire had high internal consistency, and its reproducibility, examined by test-retest reliability, was found to be satisfactory. Its validity was established by obtaining significant correlations in the expected direction with the AKS scores and the relevant parts of the SF36 and HAQ. Sensitivity to change was assessed by analysing the differences between the preoperative scores and those at follow-up. We also compared change in scores with the patients' retrospective judgement of change in their condition. The effect size for the new questionnaire compared favourably with those for the relevant parts of the SF36. The change scores for the new knee questionnaire were significantly greater (p < 0.0001) for patients who reported the most improvement in their condition. The new questionnaire provides a measure of outcome for TKR that is short, practical, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinically important changes over time.

Diagnosis and Management of Prosthetic Joint Infection: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Abstract: These guidelines are intended for use by infectious disease specialists, orthopedists, and other healthcare professionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI). They include evidence-based and opinion-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with PJI treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis, resection arthroplasty with or without subsequent staged reimplantation, 1-stage reimplantation, and amputation.

2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections

Abstract: Foot infections are a common and serious problem in persons with diabetes Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) typically begin in a wound, most often a neuropathic ulceration While all wounds are colonized with microorganisms, the presence of infection is defined by ≥2 classic findings of inflammation or purulence Infections are then classified into mild (superficial and limited in size and depth), moderate (deeper or more extensive), or severe (accompanied by systemic signs or metabolic perturbations) This classification system, along with a vascular assessment, helps determine which patients should be hospitalized, which may require special imaging procedures or surgical interventions, and which will require amputation Most DFIs are polymicrobial, with aerobic gram-positive cocci (GPC), and especially staphylococci, the most common causative organisms Aerobic gram-negative bacilli are frequently copathogens in infections that are chronic or follow antibiotic treatment, and obligate anaerobes may be copathogens in ischemic or necrotic wounds Wounds without evidence of soft tissue or bone infection do not require antibiotic therapy For infected wounds, obtain a post-debridement specimen (preferably of tissue) for aerobic and anaerobic culture Empiric antibiotic therapy can be narrowly targeted at GPC in many acutely infected patients, but those at risk for infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms or with chronic, previously treated, or severe infections usually require broader spectrum regimens Imaging is helpful in most DFIs; plain radiographs may be sufficient, but magnetic resonance imaging is far more sensitive and specific Osteomyelitis occurs in many diabetic patients with a foot wound and can be difficult to diagnose (optimally defined by bone culture and histology) and treat (often requiring surgical debridement or resection, and/or prolonged antibiotic therapy) Most DFIs require some surgical intervention, ranging from minor (debridement) to major (resection, amputation) Wounds must also be properly dressed and off-loaded of pressure, and patients need regular follow-up An ischemic foot may require revascularization, and some nonresponding patients may benefit from selected adjunctive measures Employing multidisciplinary foot teams improves outcomes Clinicians and healthcare organizations should attempt to monitor, and thereby improve, their outcomes and processes in caring for DFIs