BackgroundThe Olympic Movement Medical Code encourages all stakeholders to ensure that sport is practised without danger to the health of the athletes. Systematic surveillance of injuries and illnesses is the foundation for developing preventive measures in sport.AimTo analyse the injuries and illnesses that occurred during the Games of the XXX Olympiad, held in London in 2012.MethodsWe recorded the daily occurrence (or non-occurrence) of injuries and illnesses (1) through the reporting of all National Olympic Committee (NOC) medical teams and (2) in the polyclinic and medical venues by the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games’ (LOCOG) medical staff.ResultsIn total, 10 568 athletes (4676 women and 5892 men) from 204 NOCs participated in the study. NOC and LOCOG medical staff reported 1361 injuries and 758 illnesses, equalling incidences of 128.8 injuries and 71.7 illnesses per 1000 athletes. Altogether, 11% and 7% of the athletes incurred at least one injury or illness, respectively. The risk of an athlete being injured was the highest in taekwondo, football, BMX, handball, mountain bike, athletics, weightlifting, hockey and badminton, and the lowest in archery, canoe slalom and sprint, track cycling, rowing, shooting and equestrian. 35% of the injuries were expected to prevent the athlete from participating during competition or training. Women suffered 60% more illnesses than men (86.0 vs 53.3 illnesses per 1000 athletes). The rate of illness was the highest in athletics, beach volleyball, football, sailing, synchronised swimming and taekwondo. A total of 310 illnesses (41%) affected the respiratory system and the most common cause of illness was infection (n=347, 46%).ConclusionsAt least 11% of the athletes incurred an injury during the games and 7% of the athletes’ an illness. The incidence of injuries and illnesses varied substantially among sports. Future initiatives should include the development of preventive measures tailored for each specific sport and the continued focus among sport bodies to institute and further develop scientific injury and illness surveillance systems.

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a complex procedure which carries both a greater risk for patients and greater cost for the treating hospital than does a primary TKA. As well as the increased cost of peri-operative investigations, blood transfusions, surgical instrumentation, implants and operating time, there is a well-documented increased length of stay which accounts for most of the actual costs associated with surgery. We compared revision surgery for infection with revision for other causes (pain, instability, aseptic loosening and fracture). Complete clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 168 consecutive revision TKAs performed at a tertiary referral centre between 2005 and 2012. Revision surgery for infection was associated with a mean length of stay more than double that of aseptic cases (21.5 vs 9.5 days, p < 0.0001). The mean cost of a revision for infection was more than three times that of an aseptic revision (£30 011 (sd 4514) vs £9655 (sd 599.7), p < 0.0001). Current NHS tariffs do not fully reimburse the increased costs of providing a revision knee surgery service. Moreover, especially as greater costs are incurred for infected cases. These losses may adversely affect the provision of revision surgery in the NHS.

A 72 year-old-male was referred to our institution with recalcitrant prepatellar bursitis. The injury was sustained after striking his right knee against a post whilst horse riding 9 months ago. Previous treatments included repeated aspiration and excision of the bursa with elastic compression bandaging. A diagnosis of a Morel-Lavallée internal degloving injury was made, and the lesion was satisfactorily managed by an internal quilting procedure to eliminate the potential dead space. A review of the literature reveals 29 published reports of Morel-Lavallée lesions with sufficient information for inclusion. These came from 14 separate countries with a total of 204 lesions in 195 patients. The most common anatomical location was the greater trochanter/hip (36%), followed by the thigh (24%) and the pelvis (19%). Most were managed surgically with evacuation of the haematoma and necrotic tissue followed by debridement, which was often repeated (36%). Conservative treatment with percutaneous aspiration and compression bandaging was the next most common treatment (23%). The knee was the fourth most common region affected (16%), and only 3 other lesions in the literature have been managed with a quilting procedure.

Revision arthroplasty of the hip is expensive owing to the increased cost of pre-operative investigations, surgical implants and instrumentation, protracted hospital stay and drugs. We compared the costs of performing this surgery for aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture. Clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 305 consecutive revision total hip replacements in 286 patients performed at a tertiary referral centre between 1999 and 2008. The mean total costs for revision surgery in aseptic cases (n = 194) were £11 897 (sd 4629), for septic revision (n = 76) £21 937 (sd 10 965), for peri-prosthetic fracture (n = 24) £18 185 (sd 9124), and for dislocation (n = 11) £10 893 (sd 5476). Surgery for deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture was associated with longer operating times, increased blood loss and an increase in complications compared to revisions for aseptic loosening. Total inpatient stay was also significantly longer on average (p < 0.001). Financial costs vary significantly by indication, which is not reflected in current National Health Service tariffs.

Shoulder dislocation is the most common large joint dislocation in the body. Recent advances in radiological imaging and shoulder surgery have shown the potential dangers of traditional reduction techniques such as the Kocher's and the Hippocratic methods, which are still advocated by many textbooks. Many non-specialists continue to use these techniques, unaware of their potential risks. This article reviews the clinical and radiographic presentation of dislocation; some common reduction techniques; their risks and success rate; analgesia methods to facilitate the reduction; and postreduction management. Many textbooks advocate methods that have been superceded by safer alternatives. Trainees should learn better and safer relocation methods backed up by the current evidence available.