JTO
02 Mar 2026

JTO - March 2026

Volume 14 Issue 1

From the Executive Editor

I hope you had a good start to the year and welcome to the first issue of JTO for 2026. In keeping with the International Women’s Day this month, the themed section of this issue features topics focusing on women in orthopaedics and trauma, with a guest editorial by Deborah Eastwood. I would like to say a special thanks to Meg Baker, BOTA President, for the cover artwork which is a lovely reflection of this theme.

As surgeons, more so than many other professions, we deal with physical and psychological adversities and challenges fairly regularly in our
working lives. Managing and mitigating some of these hazards may happen naturally with training and experience, but some hazards do need proactive and specific measures to prevent harm. Adding to the previous articles in JTO covering occupational hazards in our operating theatres, Gianluca Gonzi and Hiro Tanaka outline the common hazards from chemical exposure that we encounter, the relevant health and safety regulations, and measures we can take to mitigate them. Tahir Khan and Taimoor Khan explain how an unintended adverse event in surgical practice could potentially create a destructive domino effect leading to psychological and moral injury and affecting the patient, surgeon, and subsequent patients as the primary, second, and third victims.

 

The increasing prevalence of multiple long-term conditions and complex medical needs in T&O patients has made the creation of multi-disciplinary teams harnessing existing local and regional expertise essential for provision of the best possible patient care. Adrienne Jennings and Stephen Dalgleish highlight the benefits in embedding an acute physician in routine orthopaedic care. The Royal College of Anaesthetists are conducting a national audit project (NAP 8), which is another important aspect of inter-disciplinary
perioperative care, and I would urge you all to consider contributing to it.

Whilst our practice should be driven by science, personalising treatment decisions remains a challenge in many areas. Deiary Kader and co-authors propose an interesting concept of ‘Personalised Data Driven Practice’ supported by AI as a means of achieving personalised decision-making or ‘precision medicine’. We do however need to collectively continue our drive to generate high quality primary evidence to underpin our practice, as data from primary evidence is essential for any subsequent AI assisted synthesis for personalising treatment decisions.

Features covering education and training include an overview and current state of the United Kingdom and Ireland In Training Exam (UKITE) by Mark Sohatee; a guide to RCS accreditation of courses and educational programmes by Paul Banaszkiewicz; and an instructional piece on commonly missed injuries in the foot and ankle by Patrick Laing.

As always, the editorial team appreciates the timely contributions from colleagues that makes the JTO an interesting and good read!

Amar Rangan, Vice-President

 

Subspecialty Section

References

Beyond the primary victim: Acknowledging the secondary and tertiary victim in orthopaedic surgical practice

  1. Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., & Donaldson, M. S. (Eds.). (2000). To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academies Press.
  2. Wu, A. W. (2000). Medical error: the second victim. BMJ, 320(7237), 726–727.
  3. Seys, D., Wu, A. W., Van Gerven, E., et al. (2013). Health care professionals as second victims after adverse events: a systematic review. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 36(2), 135–162.
  4. Gallagher, T. H., Waterman, A. D., Ebers, A. G., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W. (2003). Patients' and physicians' attitudes regarding the disclosure of medical errors. JAMA, 289(8), 1001–1007.
  5. Shanafelt, T. D., Balch, C. M., Bechamps, G., et al. (2010). Burnout and career satisfaction among American surgeons. Annals of Surgery, 252(2), 263–273.
  6. Scott, S. D., Hirschinger, L. E., Cox, K. R., et al. (2009). The natural history of recovery for the healthcare provider "second victim" after adverse patient events. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 18(5), 325–330.
  7. Dean, W., Talbot, S. G., & Dean, A. (2019). Reframing clinician distress: moral injury not burnout. Federal Practitioner, 36(9), 400–402.
  8. Balch, C. M., Oreskovich, M. R., Dyrbye, L. N., et al. (2011). Personal consequences of malpractice lawsuits on American surgeons. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 213(5), 657–667.
  9. Vanhaecht, K., Seys, D., Russotto, S., et al. (2020). An evidence and consensus-based framework for the second victim phenomenon. Journal of Patient Safety, 16(4), e324-e332.
  10. Dekker, S. (2016). Just Culture: Restoring Trust and Accountability in Your Organization (3rd ed.). CRC Press.
  11. Tam A, Bateman S, Buckingham G, Wilson M, Melendez-Torres GJ, Vine S, Clark J. The effects of stress on surgical performance: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2025 Jan;39(1):77-98. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11389-3. Epub 2024 Dec 3. PMID: 39627555; PMCID: PMC11666721.
  12. Majeed H. Litigations in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: analysis and outcomes of medicolegal claims during the last 10 years in the United Kingdom National Health Service. EFORT Open Rev. 2021 Mar 1;6(3):152-159. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200100. PMID: 33841913; PMCID: PMC8025704.
  13. Burnes D, Connolly MT, Salvo E, Kimball PF, Rogers G, Lewis S. RISE: A Conceptual Model of Integrated and Restorative Elder Abuse Intervention. Gerontologist. 2023 Jul 18;63(6):966-973. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnac083. PMID: 35705108; PMCID: PMC10353038.
  14. Fostering path to a just culture in healthcare organizations: Influential factors and challenges. December 2023. Jurnal Aisyah Jurnal Ilmu Kesehatan 8(4). DOI:10.30604/jika.v8i4.2413
  15. Shalaby RAH, Agyapong VIO. Peer Support in Mental Health: Literature Review. JMIR Ment Health. 2020 Jun 9;7(6):e15572. doi: 10.2196/15572. PMID: 32357127; PMCID: PMC7312261.
  16. Wongworawat, M. Daniel MD1. Editorial: Coming Back to Work After a Wrong-site Surgical Procedure. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 483(6):p 965-966, June 2025.
  17. Lichtblau, Ethan MD, FRCS(C)1. Letter to the Editor: Editorial: Coming Back to Work After a Wrong-site Surgical Procedure. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research , September 23, 2025. |
  18. Balch CM, Bechamps G. Substance Abuse Among Surgeons: The Perils of Losing Your Credentials: Comment on “Prognosis for the Recovery of Surgeons From Chemical Dependency”. Arch Surg. 2011;146(11):1291–1292. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.309

When ‘best evidence’ is not enough: Is AI the future of orthopaedic decision-making

  1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312:71-2.
  2. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N, et al. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ. 2014;348:g3725.
  3. Schräder P, Scharf HP, Günther KP, et al. Evidence-based medicine in orthopedics - a sensible or unnecessary addition to clinical routine? Part 1: the diagnostics tool. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2003;141:386-90.
  4. Lafuente-Lafuente C, Alvarez R, Regueiro A, et al. Knowledge and use of evidence-based medicine in daily medical practice. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0212436.
  5. Araoye I, Trip J, Cooper J, et al. A national survey of orthopaedic residents identifies deficits in biostatistics and study design knowledge. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020;102:e8.
  6. Al Mohrej OA, Al-Mayouf SM, Al-Kenani NS, et al. Research activities and critical appraisal skills among Saudi orthopedic surgery residents. Saudi Med J. 2021;42:29-36.
  7. Parsons NR, Hiskens R, Price CL, et al. An evaluation of publication bias in high-impact orthopaedic literature. J Orthop Trauma. 2019;33:409-14.
  8. Ioannidis JPA, Stuart ME, Brownlee S, et al. How to survive the medical misinformation mess. Eur J Clin Invest. 2017;47:795-802.
  9. Ioannidis JPA. Why most clinical research is not useful. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002049.
  10. McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M, et al. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ. 2002;324:1448-51.
  11. Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM, Struijs PAA, et al. Don't be misled by the orthopaedic literature: tips for critical appraisal. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:162-71.
  12. Spindler KP, Kuhn JE, Dunn W, et al. Reading and reviewing the orthopaedic literature: a systematic, evidence-based medicine approach. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13:220-9.
  13. Bennell KL, Paterson KL, Metcalf BR, et al. Effect of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma vs placebo injection on knee osteoarthritis symptoms and cartilage morphology at twelve months. JAMA. 2021;326:2021-2030.
  14. Kolasinski SL, Neogi T, Hochberg MC, et al. 2019 American College of Rheumatology and Arthritis Foundation guideline for the management of osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and knee. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2020;72:149-62.
  15. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Platelet-rich plasma injections for knee osteoarthritis. Interventional Procedures Guidance IPG637. London: NICE; 2019.
  16. US Food and Drug Administration. Consumer alert on regenerative medicine products including stem cells and exosomes. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/consumers-biologics/consumer-alert-regenerative-medicine-products-including-stem-cells-and-exosomes. Accessed September 18, 2025.
  17. Dai W, Leng X, Wang J, et al. Quadriceps tendon autograft versus bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendon autografts for ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2022;50:1624-36.
  18. Raj S, Ridha A, Searle HKC, et al. Quadriceps tendon versus hamstring tendon graft for primary ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Knee. 2024;45:76-84.
  19. Tang P, Marshall B, Bou-Akl T, et al. Suture tape augmentation in the management of anterior cruciate ligament tears: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy. 2025;41:284-95.
  20. Sun J, Luo J, Ruan G, et al. The growth of scientific publications in 2020: a bibliometric analysis with orthopaedics sub-analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21:153.
  21. Albarqouni L, Hoffmann T, Straus S, et al. Core competencies in evidence-based practice for health professionals: consensus statement based on a systematic review and Delphi survey. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:e180281.
  22. Hohmann E, Glatt V, Tetsworth K, et al. Industry sponsorship and its impact on orthopaedic research. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475:2893-900.
  23. Trayer J, Rowbotham NJ, Boyle RJ, et al. Industry influence in healthcare harms patients: myth or maxim? Breathe (Sheff). 2022;18:220010.
  24. Manz C, Huth EJ, Goldman L. Marketing to physicians in the digital age: ethical challenges. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1857-9.
  25. Demasi M. From FDA to MHRA: are drug regulators for hire? BMJ. 2022;377:o1538.
  26. Obermeyer Z, Emanuel EJ. Predicting the future - big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1216-19.
  27. Chen JH, Asch SM. Machine learning and prediction in medicine - beyond the peak of inflated expectations. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2507-9.
  28. Wang L, Alexander CA, Zhao H, et al. Big data analytics in medical engineering and healthcare: methods, advances and challenges. J Med Eng Technol. 2018;42:243-56.
  29. Howard BE, Phillips J, Miller K, et al. SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review. Syst Rev. 2016;5:87.
  30. Malekar S, Hakim A, Toney-Bolger ME, et al. Artificial intelligence in orthopedic surgery. Bone Jt Open. 2023;4:67-75.
  31. Myers TG, Ramkumar PN, Ricciardi BF, et al. Artificial intelligence and orthopaedics: an introduction for clinicians. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020;102:830-40.
  32. Farhadi F, Barnes MR, Sugito HR, et al. Applications of artificial intelligence in orthopaedic surgery. Front Med Technol. 2022;4:995526.
  33. Fontalis A, Prouskas K, Board TN, et al. Artificial intelligence in orthopaedic surgery. EFORT Open Rev. 2023;8:725-35.
  34. Lisacek-Kiosoglous AB, Powling AS, Fontalis A, et al. Artificial intelligence in orthopaedic surgery: exploring its applications, limitations, and future direction. Bone Joint Res. 2023;12:447-54.
  35. Kader DF, Porteous AJ, Kader N, et al. The future of precision orthopaedics: personalized data-driven practice. Bone Jt Open. 2025;6:BJO-2025-0056.R1.
  36. Clement ND, Simpson AHRW. Artificial intelligence in orthopaedics: what level of evidence does it represent and how is it validated? Bone Joint Res. 2023;12:494-6.
  37. Farrow L, Zhong M, Ashcroft GP, et al. Interpretation and reporting of predictive or diagnostic machine-learning research in Trauma & Orthopaedics. Bone Joint J. 2021;103-B:1754-8.
  38. Langerhuizen DWG, Janssen SJ, Mallee WH, et al. What are the applications and limitations of artificial intelligence for fracture detection and classification in orthopaedic trauma imaging? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019;477:2482-91.
  39. Magan AA, Kayani B, Chang JS, et al. Artificial intelligence and surgical innovation: lower limb arthroplasty. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2020;81:1-7.
  40. Leopold SS, Haddad FS, Sandborn PM, et al. Editorial: Artificial intelligence applications and scholarly publication in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2023;481:1127-30.
  41. Vander Griend RA, Campbell JT, Chiodo CP, et al. Artificial intelligence and scholarly publication in Foot & Ankle International and Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics. Foot Ankle Int. 2024;45:207.
  42. Ng FYC, Thirunavukarasu AJ, Cheng H, et al. Artificial intelligence education: an evidence-based medicine approach for consumers, translators, and developers. Cell Rep Med. 2023;4:e101230.
  43. Sun L, Yin C, Xu Q, et al. Artificial intelligence for healthcare and medical education: a systematic review. Am J Transl Res. 2023;15:4820-8.
  44. Grunhut J, Wyatt AT, Marques O. Educating future physicians in artificial intelligence (AI): an integrative review and proposed changes. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2021;8:23821205211036836.

Chemical hazards in orthopaedic surgery: The invisible threat in our operating theatres

  1. Gift JS. Toxicological review of methyl methacrylate. In support of summary information on the integrated risk information system (IRIS): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998.
  2. Tomenson JA, Carpenter AV, Pember ton MA. Critical review of the epidemiology literature on the potential cancer risks of methyl methacrylate. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2005; 78: 603–612.
  3. Linehan CM, Gioe TJ. Serum and breast milk levels of methylmethacrylate following surgeon exposure during arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88(9): 1957-1961.
  4. Debrunner HU. Untersuchungen zur Porosität von Knochenzementen. Arch Orthop Unfallchir 1976; 86: 261–278.
  5. Schlegel UJ, Sturm M, Ewerbeck V, Breusch SJ. Efficacy of vacuum bone cement mixing systems in reducing methylmethacrylate fume exposure: comparison of 7 different mixing devices and handmixing. Acta Orthop Scand 2004; 75: 559–566.
  6. Lindsey C, Hutchinson M, Mellor G. The nature and hazards of diathermy plumes : a review. AORN 2015; 101(4): 428-442.
  7. Zhou Y, Wang C, Zhou M, Li Z, Chen D, Lian A, Ma Y. Surgical smoke : a hidden killer in the operating room. Asian J of Surg 2023; 46(9): 3447-3454.
  8. Spearman J, Tsavellas G, Nichols P. Current attitudes and practices towards diathermy smoke 2007; 89(2): https://doi.org/10.1308/003588407X155752
  9. Keene R, Hillard-Sembell D, Robinson B, Novicoff W, Saleh K. Occupational hazards to the pregnant orthopaedic surgeon. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93(23) :1411-1415.
  10. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-151/pdfs/2007-151.pdf
  11. Board R, Barrow J, Whelton C, Board T. Real time monitoring of carbon dioxide levels in surgical helmet systems worn during hip and knee arthroplasty. J Orthop 2024; 57: 79-82.
  12. https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/glutaraldehyde.pdf
  13. Campbell P, Takamura K. Local and systemic consequences of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing implants. Ann Joint 2020; 5:5.
  14. Hansen A, Brans R, Sonsmann F. Allergic contact dermatitis to rubber accelerators in protective gloves : problems, challenges and solutions for occupational skin protection. Allergol Select 2021; 22(5): 335-344.

The United Kingdom and Ireland In Training Exam (UKITE): Current perceptions, utilisation and suggestions for its implementation

  1. British Orthopaedic Association. UK and Ireland In-Training Examination (UKITE) [Internet]. London: BOA; [cited 2025 Aug 31]. Available from: https://www.boa.ac.uk/learning-and-events/ukite.html
  2. British Orthopaedic Association. UKITE FAQs for Candidates [Internet]. London: BOA; [cited 2025 Aug 31]. Available from: https://www.boa.ac.uk/learning-and-events/ukite/ukite-faqs-for-candidates.html
  3. British Orthopaedic Association. UKITE FAQs for TPDs [Internet]. London: BOA; [cited 2025 Aug 31]. Available from: https://www.boa.ac.uk/learning-and-events/ukite/ukite-faqs-for-tpds.html
  4. British Orthopaedic Association. What to Expect from UKITE [Internet]. London: BOA; [cited 2025 Aug 31]. Available from: https://www.boa.ac.uk/learning-and-events/ukite/what-to-expect.html
  5. General Medical Council. Curriculum for Trauma and Orthopaedics. London: GMC; 2023.
  6. Tuckett A, Banerjee S, Montgomery A. The role of formative assessment in postgraduate surgical training. Med Educ. 2019;53(3):240–248.
  7. Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela V, Burch V, Costa MJ, Duvivier R, et al. 2018 Consensus framework for good assessment. Med Teach. 2018;40(11):1102–1109.

Hormonal related joint injuries in women

  1. Wright V. J, Schwartzman J.D, Itinoche R, Wittstein J. (2024) The musculoskeletal syndrome of menopause. Climacteric, 27 (5), 466-472. https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2024.2380363
  2.  Chidi-Ogbolu N, Barr K. (2019) The Effect of Estrogen on Musculoskeletal Performance and Injury Risk. Review, Front. Physiol 9:1834 https://doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.01834
  3. Gompels B D et al.  The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury ‘Epidemic’: A perfect storm for Post-Traumatic Osteoarthritis. Sports Medicine and Health Science https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2025.12.001
  4. Gilmer G, Crasta N, Tanaka MJ. The Effect of Hormones on Joint Ligament Properties: A systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2025; 53(11): 2738-2748. doi:10.1177/03635465241310145
  5. Lu J, Xian T-J, Li C-J, Wang Y. The oestrogen-brain interface in neuroinflammation: a multidimensional mechanistic insight. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2025; 17:1671552. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1671552
  6. Saber B, Bridger D, Agrawal D K. A Critical Analysis of the Factors Contributing to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in Female Athletes. J Orthop Sports Med 2024, Oct 4;6(4): 203-9
  7. ACL injury Rates: Women Athletes Face Unique Challenges April 3, 2025. www.usmaul.com
  8. Prather H, Camacho-Sopto A. Musculoskeletal Etiologies of Pelvic Pain. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 41 (2014) 433–442
  9. Hughes C, May S. A directional preference approach for chronic pelvic pain, bladder dysfunction and concurrent musculoskeletal symptoms: a case series. J Manual and Manipulative Therapy 2020; Vol 28(3):170-180
  10. Navot S, Kalichman L. Hip and groin pain in a cyclist resolved after performing a pelvic floor fascial mobilization. J of Bodywork & Movement Therapies 2016; 20:604-9
  11. Borkhoff C M, Hawker G A, Kreder H J, Glazier R H, Mahomed N N, Wright J G. The Effect of Patients’ sex on physicians’ recommendations for total knee arthroplasty. CMAJ 2008;178 (6):681-687
  12. Henderson J T, Weisman C S. Physician gender effects on preventative screening and counselling: an analysis of male and female patient health care experiences. Med Care 2001; 39(10):1281-1292
  13. British Orthopaedic Association Strategic Plan 2025-2029. www.boa.ac.uk
Return to Knowledge Hub