Improvement of Orthopedic Residency Programs and Diversity: Dilemmas and Challenges, an International Perspective.

BACKGROUND: To date, little has been published comparing the structure and requirements of orthopedic training programs across multiple countries. The goal of this study was to summarize and compare the characteristics of orthopedic training programs in the U.S.A., U.K., Canada, Australia, Germany, India, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran. METHODS: We communicated with responders using a predetermined questionnaire regarding the national orthopedic training program requirements in each respondent's home country. Specific items of interest included the following: the structure of the residency program, the time required to become an orthopedic surgeon, whether there is a log book, whether there is a final examination prior to becoming an orthopedic surgeon, the type and extent of faculty supervision, and the nature of national in-training written exams and assessment methods. Questionnaire data were augmented by reviewing each country's publicly accessible residency training documents that are available on the web and visiting the official website of the main orthopedic association of each country. RESULTS: The syllabi consist of three elements: clinical knowledge, clinical skills, and professional skills. The skill of today's trainees predicts the quality of future orthopedic surgeons. The European Board of Orthopedics and Traumatology (EBOT) exam throughout the European Union countries should function as the European board examination in orthopedics. We must standardize many educational procedures worldwide in the same way we standardized patient safety. CONCLUSION: Considering the world's cultural and political diversity, the world is nearly unified in regards to orthopedics. The procedures (structure of the residency programs, duration of the residency programs, selection procedures, using a log book, continuous assessment and final examination) must be standardized worldwide, as implemented for patient safety. To achieve this goal, we must access and evaluate more information on the residency programs in different countries and their needs by questioning them regarding what they need and what we can do for them to make a difference.

The Zeitgeist of Challenging the Evidence. A Perspective on the International Consensus Meeting on Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: The economic burden of the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is high and the treatment of PJI has a high degree of international controversy. Several papers have declared the International Consensus Meeting on Periprosthetic Joint Infection (ICMPJI) to be the "flawless pledge of international academics" to overcome the challenges of musculoskeletal infections. The purpose of this paper is to highlight for the first time some essential insights into the key dilemmas that are associated with this international consensus process. METHODS: The proceedings of the ICMPJI was reviewed, and the critical consensus agreements that were reached were communicated via e-mail to 48 leading orthopaedic surgeons, microbiologists and statisticians around the world. Of these, 30 responded, 8 did not, and 10 of respondents were not aware of the ICMPJI. RESULTS: A thorough review of the ICMPJI proceedings identified a clear need to resolve some of the dilemmas that we highlight in this paper. The Delphi procedure has been described as a survey technique that enables a group dynamic-based practice. Although there have been several published reports on this procedure, its scientific merit is still being debated. Several challenges and questions have been raised regarding the application of the Delphi technique, but there is no doubt that it is a vital approach for achieving consensus on subjects where none currently exists. CONCLUSION: Performing prospective clinical studies in this area is currently the best and only option to overcome this challenge. In the long term, this approach will not only incorporate the standard of clinical evidence but also adopt regional mores for treating infection, which include patient values, cultural differences and local financial resources.

Improvement of research quality in the fields of orthopaedics and trauma: a global perspective.

The international orthopaedic community aims to achieve the best possible outcome for patient care by constantly modifying surgical techniques and expanding the surgeon's knowledge. These efforts require proper reflection within a setting that necessitates a higher quality standard for global orthopaedic publication. Furthermore, these techniques demand that surgeons acquire information at a rapid rate while enforcing higher standards in research performance. An international consensus exists on how to perform research and what rules should be considered when publishing a scientific paper. Despite this global agreement, in today's "Cross Check Era", too many authors do not give attention to the current standards of systematic research. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to describe these performance standards, the available choices for orthopaedic surgeons and the current learning curve for seasoned teams of researchers and orthopaedic surgeons with more than three decades of experience. These lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the topics that will significantly influence the research development as we arrive at an important globalisation era in orthopaedics and trauma-related research.

Challenges and barriers to improving care of the musculoskeletal patient of the future - a debate article and global perspective.

BACKGROUND: With greater technological developments in the care of musculoskeletal patients, we are entering an era of rapid change in our understanding of the pathophysiology of traumatic injury; assessment and treatment of polytrauma and related disorders; and treatment outcomes. In developed countries, it is very likely that we will have algorithms for the approach to many musculoskeletal disorders as we strive for the best approach with which to evaluate treatment success. This debate article is founded on predictions of future health care needs that are solely based on the subjective inputs and opinions of the world's leading orthopedic surgeons.Hence, it functions more as a forum-based rather than a scientific-based presentation. This exposé was designed to stimulate debate about the emerging patients' needs in the future predicted by leading orthopedic surgeons that provide some hint as to the right direction for orthopedic care and outlines the important topics in this area. DISCUSSION: The authors aim to provide a general overview of orthopedic care in a typical developed country setting. However, the regional diversity of the United States and every other industrialized nation should be considered as a cofactor that may vary to some extent from our vision of improved orthopedic and trauma care of the musculoskeletal patient on an interregional level.In this forum, we will define the current and future barriers in developed countries related to musculoskeletal trauma, total joint arthroplasty, patient safety and injuries related to military conflicts, all problems that will only increase as populations age, become more mobile, and deal with political crisis. SUMMARY: It is very likely that the future will bring a more biological approach to fracture care with less invasive surgical procedures, flexible implants, and more rapid rehabilitation methods. This international consortium challenges the trauma and implants community to develop outcome registries that are managed through health care offices and to prepare effectively for the many future challenges that lie in store for those who treat musculoskeletal conditions.

The role of stem cells in fracture healing and nonunion.

Nonunion and large bone defects present a therapeutic challenge to the surgeon and are often associated with significant morbidity. These defects are expensive to both the health care system and society. However, several surgical procedures have been developed to maximise patient satisfaction and minimise health-care-associated and socioeconomic costs. Integrating recent evidence into the diamond concept leads to one simple conclusion that not only provides us with answers to the "open questions" but also simplifies our entire understanding of bone healing. It has been shown that a combination of neo-osteogenesis and neovascularisation will restore tissue deficits, and that the optimal approach includes a biomaterial scaffold, cell biology techniques, a growth factor and optimisation of the mechanical environment. Further prospective, controlled, randomised clinical studies will determine the effectiveness and economic benefits of treatment with mesenchymal stem cells, not in comparison to other conventional surgical approaches but in direct conjunction with them.