Search

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on orthopaedic and trauma surgery training in Europe by conducting an online survey among orthopaedic trainees. Methods The survey was conducted among members of the Federation of Orthopaedic and Trauma Trainees in Europe (FORTE). It consisted of 24 questions (single-answer, multiple-answer, Likert scales). Orthopaedic trainees’ demographic data (six questions), clinical role changes (four questions), institutional changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic (nine questions), and personal considerations (five questions) were examined. Results Three hundred and twenty-seven trainees from 23 European countries completed the survey. Most trainees retained their customary clinical role (59.8%), but a significant number was redeployed to COVID-19 units (20.9%). A drastic workload decrease during the pandemic was reported at most institutions. Only essential activities were performed at 57.1% of institutions and drastic disruptions were reported at 36.0%. Of the respondents, 52.1% stated that faculty-led education was restricted and 46.3% pursued self-guided learning, while 58.6% stated that surgical training was significantly impaired. Concerns about the achievement of annual training goals were expressed by 58.2% of the participants, while 25.0% anticipated the need for an additional year of training. Conclusions The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic significantly affected orthopaedic and trauma training in Europe. Most trainees felt the decrease in clinical, surgical, and educational activities would have a detrimental effect on their training. Many of them consulted remote learning options to compensate training impairment, stating that after the COVID-19 pandemic electronic educational approaches may become more relevant in future. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00264-020-04742-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

PURPOSE: Combinations of intra- and extra-articular procedures have been proposed for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the aim of achieving an optimal control of translational and rotational knee laxities. Recently, the need for better reproducing the structural and functional behavior of the native anterior cruciate ligament led to the definition of anatomic double-bundle surgical approach. This study aimed to quantitatively verify whether the in vivo static and dynamic behavior obtained using over-the-top single-bundle with extra-articular tenodesis reconstruction was comparable to the results achieved by anatomic double-bundle approach. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients, with an isolated anterior cruciate ligament injury, were included in the study. Standard clinical laxities and pivot-shift test were quantified before and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by means of a surgical navigation system dedicated to kinematic assessment; displacements of medial and lateral compartment during stress tests were also analyzed. RESULTS: Single-bundle with extra-articular tenodesis approach presented statistically better laxity reduction in varus/valgus stress test at full extension and in internal/external rotation at 90° of flexion; lateral plasty controlled better the lateral compartment during drawer test and varus/valgus stress test both at 0° and 30° of flexion and both the compartments during internal/external rotation at 90° of flexion. On the other hand, pivot-shift phenomenon was better controlled by anatomic double-bundle reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Both the reconstructions worked similarly for static knee laxity. The extra-articular procedure played an important role in better constraining the displacement of lateral tibial compartment, whereas the anatomic double-bundle reconstruction better restored the dynamic behavior of knee joint highlighted under pivot-shift stress test. STUDY DESIGN: Case series.

No abstract available