Abstract
Objectives: This is the first national study observing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic trauma with respect to referrals, operative caseload and mortality during the first six weeks (namely the "golden peak weeks") following the introduction of the national social distancing and lockdown measures from mid-March 2020. Design: A longitudinal, national, multi-centre, retrospective, observational, cohort study was conducted for the first six weeks from March 17, 2020 from start of the national social distancing and then lockdown compared to the same period in 2019 as a comparative baseline. Setting: Hospitals from seven major urban cities were recruited around the UK, including London, representing a comprehensive national picture of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic and its lockdown at its peak. Participants: A total of 4840 clinical encounters were initially recorded. Exclusion criterion consisted of spinal pathology only. Post-exclusion, 4668 clinical encounters were recorded and analysed within the two timeframes. Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes included the number of acute trauma referrals and those undergoing operative intervention, patient demographics, mortality rates, and the proportion of patients contracting COVID-19. Secondary outcomes consisted of the mechanism of injury, type of operative intervention and proportion of aerosolising-generating anaesthesia utilised. Demographics for each patient was recorded along with underlying medical co-morbidities. Sub-group analysis compared mortalities between both cohorts. Statistical analyses included mean (+/-SD), risk and odds ratios, as well as Fisher's exact test to calculate the statistical significance (p = 0.05). Results: During the COVID-19 period there was a 34% reduction in acute orthopaedic trauma referrals compared to 2019 (1792 down to 1183 referrals), and 29.5% less surgical interventions (993 down to 700 operations). The mortality rate significantly (both statistically and clinically) more than doubled for both risk and odds ratios during the COVID period in all referrals (1.3% vs 3.8%, p=0.0005) and in those undergoing operative intervention (2.2% vs 4.9%, p=0.004). Moreover, mortality due to COVID-related complications (versus non-COVID causes) had greater odds by a factor of at least 20 times. The odds ratios of road traffic accidents, sporting injuries, infection, and lower limb injuries were significantly less (by a third to a half) during the COVID period; albeit, the odds of sustaining neck of femur fractures and having falls <1.5m increased by more than 50%. For the operative cohorts, there was a greater odds of aerosolising-generating anaesthesia (including those with superimposed regional blocks) by three-quarters as well as doubling of the odds of a Consultant acting as the primary surgeon. Nevertheless, the odds of open reduction and internal fixation reduced by a quarter whereas removal of metalwork or foreign bodies reduced by three-quarters. Six-week Kaplan-Meier survival probability analysis confirmed those patients with neck of femur fracture and pre-existing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease were most at risk of mortality during the COVID-19 era. Conclusion: Although there was a reduction of acute trauma referrals and those undergoing operative intervention, the mortality rate still more than doubled in odds during the peak of the pandemic compared to the same time interval one year ago. Elderly patients with neck of femur fractures and existing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular comorbidities were at the highest risk stratification for mortality. This was the first national study to assess impact of COVID-19 pandemic on acute Orthopaedic trauma and it will aid clinicians in counselling trauma patients of the increased risk of mortality during the era of COVID-19 as well as acting as a risk-prediction tool influencing policymaking as the pandemic continues with potential subsequent waves. Further studies after the lifting of the lockdown are also required to observe for return of standard practice.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study required nor received any internal or external funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All data points were utilised for routine auditing purposes to reflect departmental activity and service provision without altering clinical care pathways. Each centre contributing data to this study registered their interests with local authority and the auditing or clinical governance departments. No informed consent was required as there was no identifiable data. All data were anonymised at the time of collection and submission. Each patient was assigned a unique identification number which was cross-referenced with the patients' individual hospital identification or medical record numbers. This cross-referenced list remained internally within the hospital trust computer server handled by the contributing team from each trust. The data was transferred and stored using the NHS.net email server which has been approved for transfer of patient data. Data protection compliance was abided by at all times. The lead center was Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust where this study was first approved as a clinical audit prior to expanding onto a national scale. All centres gave permission for the use of their data. This study was assessed using the UKRI/MRC/NHS Health Research Authority Ethics Decision Tool and was considered an 'audit/not research', and therefore it was not subject to further ethical review by the NHS Research Ethics Committee (NHS REC).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset has been amalgamated for the purpose of this study and will be made available with publication. Anything that may threaten or compromise patient anonymity means that the dataset will not be released or made available within the public domain.
