ReviewEFORT open reviews2020
An analysis of virtual fracture clinics in orthopaedic trauma in the UK during the coronavirus crisis.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Telephone follow-up clinics can lead to a reduction in cost and waiting list times without impacting patient care in elective joint injection patients.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Are Virtual Fracture Clinics really "safe"? - An evaluation of the capability of a District General Hospital Virtual Fracture Clinic pathway to detect safeguarding issues.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- The impact on time between injury and semi-acute surgery for hand fractures after virtual fracture clinic implementation.The Journal of hand surgery, European volume · 2025Article
- Patients' experiences of a Virtual Fracture Assessment Clinic Pathway: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- The Efficacy of Virtual Fracture Clinics (VFCs) and the Impact of Physician Risk Appetite on Discharge Rates.Cureus · 2024Article
- How reconfiguration of a minor injuries unit has affected service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective analysis.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2023Article
- Virtual Fracture Clinic Model in India: A Technological Innovation.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Review
- Virtual fracture clinics: be vigilant for the ligamentous elbow injury.Journal of surgical case reports · 2022Article
- Virtual fracture clinic reduces patient X-ray volume for common wrist and ankle fractures.Irish journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Virtual clinics versus face-to-face review: Is the benefit the same for new orthopaedic patients?Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022Observational
- Virtual clinics in foot and ankle surgery: patient and clinician perceptions.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2021Observational
- A Hybrid Virtual Fracture Clinic is Safe and Efficacious in the COVID-19 Era: Stay at Home and Save Lives.Cureus · 2021Article
- A multicentre national study of the effectiveness of virtual fracture clinic management of orthopaedic trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic (MAVCOV): a cross-sectional study protocol.Bone & joint open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual fracture clinics (VFC) are advocated by new orthopaedic (British Orthopaedic Association) and National Health Service (NHS) guidelines in the United Kingdom. We discuss benefits and limitations, reviewing the literature, as well as recommendations on introducing a VFC service during the coronavirus pandemic and into the future.A narrative review identifying current literature on virtual fracture clinic outcomes when compared to traditional model fracture clinics in the UK. We identify nine relevant publications related to VFC.The Glasgow model, initiated in 2011, has become the benchmark. Clinical efficiency can be improved, reducing the number of emergency department (ED) referrals seen in VFC by 15-28% and face-to-face consultations by 65%. After review in the VFC, 33-60% of patients may be discharged. Some studies have shown no negative impact on the ED; the time to discharge was not increased. Patient satisfaction ranges from 91-97% using a VFC service, and there may be cost-saving benefits annually of £67,385 to £212,705. Non-attendance may be reduced by 75% and there are educational opportunities for trainees. However, evidence is limited; 28% of patients prefer face-to-face consultations and not all have access to internet or email (72%).We propose a pathway integrating the VFC model, whilst having senior orthopaedic decision makers available in the ED, during normal working hours, to cope with the pandemic. Beyond the pandemic, evidence suggests the Glasgow model is viable for day-to-day practice. Cite this article:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.