Artificial intelligence (AI) is currently integrated into many medical services. AI is utilized in many aspects of orthopedic surgery. The scope ranges from diagnosis to complex surgery. To evaluate the perceptions, attitudes, and interests of Sudanese orthopedic surgeons regarding the different applications of AI in orthopedic surgery. This qualitative questionnaire-based study was conducted through an anonymous electronic survey using Google Forms distributed among Sudanese orthopedic surgeons. The questionnaire entailed 4 sections. The first section included the participants’ demographic data. The remaining 3 sections included questions for the assessment of the perception, attitude, and interest of surgeons toward (AI). The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were tested and piloted before the final dissemination. One hundred twenty-nine surgeons responded to the questionnaires. Most respondents needed to be more aware of the basic concepts of AI. However, most respondents were aware of its use in spinal and joint replacement surgeries. Most respondents had doubts regarding the safety of (AI). However, they were highly interested in utilizing (AI) in many orthopedic surgical aspects. Orthopedic surgery is a rapidly evolving branch of surgery that involves adoption of new technologies. Therefore, orthopedic surgeons should be encouraged to enroll in research activities to generate more studies and reviews to assess the usefulness and safety of emerging technologies.

Background/Objectives: Large-language modules facilitate accessing health information instantaneously. However, they do not provide the same level of accuracy or detail. In pediatric orthopedics, where parents have urgent concerns regarding knee deformities (bowlegs and knock knees), the accuracy and dependability of these chatbots can affect parent decisions to seek treatment. The goal of this study was to analyze how AI chatbots addressed parental concerns regarding pediatric knee deformities. Methods: A set of twenty standardized questions, consisting of ten questions each on bowlegs and knock knees, were designed through literature reviews and through analysis of parental discussion forums and expert consultations. Each of the three chatbots (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot) was asked the same set of questions. Five pediatric orthopedic surgeons were then asked to rate each response for accuracy, clarity, and comprehensiveness, along with the degree of misleading information provided, on a scale of 1–5. The reliability among raters was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), while differences among the chatbots were assessed using a Kruskal–Wallis test with post hoc pairwise comparisons. Results: All three chatbots displayed a moderate-to-good score for inter-rater reliability. ChatGPT and Gemini’s scores were higher for accuracy and comprehensiveness than Copilot’s (p < 0.05). However, no notable differences were found in clarity or in the likelihood of giving incorrect answers. Overall, more detailed and precise responses were given by ChatGPT and Gemini, while, with regard to clarity, Copilot performed comparably but was less thorough. Conclusions: There were notable discrepancies in performance across the AI chatbots in providing pediatric orthopedic information, which demonstrates indications of evolving potential. In comparison to Copilot, ChatGPT and Gemini were relatively more accurate and comprehensive. These results highlight the persistent requirement for real-time supervision and stringent validation when employing chatbots in the context of pediatric healthcare.

The legitimacy of published research confronts a real challenge posed by predatory journals. These journals not only distribute inadequately written articles but also undermine the prospects of acknowledgment and citation for high-quality content. It is essential, nevertheless, to differentiate between predatory journals and reputable open-access ones. A worldwide anti-predatory movement seeks to enhance awareness about such journals. Hence, our objective was to assess the awareness, attitudes, and practices of Sudanese orthopedic surgeons concerning both predatory and open-access publishing. Conducted between January and April 2023, this cross-sectional electronic survey involved Sudanese orthopedic surgeons. The survey, comprising five domains to gauge knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to predatory and open-access publishing, was shared via the Sudanese Orthopedic Surgeons Association email distribution list among the 561 registered surgeons. The targeted sample size was 286. Categorical variables were reported using frequencies, while continuous variables were presented as medians and interquartile ranges. Nonparametric tests and ordinal regression were employed for inferential statistics. Of the 561 surgeons, 104 participants completed the questionnaire, resulting in a response rate of 18.5 %. Approximately 49% exhibited poor knowledge, with 56% unfamiliar with the term "predatory journals," and 74% unaware of Beall's list. Overall attitudes toward publication in open-access and predatory journals were neutral for 60% of participants, and only 26% demonstrated good overall publication practices. Higher knowledge scores positively correlated with attitude and practice scores. Ordinal regression analysis identified variables such as employment in university hospitals, higher academic rank, publication experience, and working in well-resourced countries as factors increasing the likelihood of higher knowledge, attitude, and practice scores. The majority of the study participants reported very low knowledge of predatory journals and their possible detrimental consequences on the integrity and quality of scientific publications. Therefore, educational efforts on the negative impact of predatory publication practices in orthopedics are needed.

Purpose: The effects of the anatomical alignment of distal radial extra-articular fractures on the patient's perceived outcome have been drawing much attention recently, and much controversy exists in the literature. The primary purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the radiological parameters of reduction (radial inclination, radial length, and radial tilt) and the patient's perceived functional outcome, which was quantified using the DASH questionnaire. Methods: The study included one hundred twenty-four patients with distal radial extra-articular fractures managed by closed reduction and casting. Their radiological (anatomical) outcome was determined by measuring the radial inclination, tilt, and length. Subjective functional outcome was quantified using the DASH score, calculated from the Arabic-translated DASH questionnaire at three months and six months after cast removal. Results: the mean DASH score was 31.56 SD± 9.1 at three months and 29 SD± 3.89 at six months, and the acceptable radiological results for radial tilt, radial inclination, and radial length (according to McDermid's criteria for acceptable reduction) were 77.4%, 88.7% and 74.4%, respectively. There was a significant linear correlation between two radiological parameters (radial tilt and radial length) and the DASH score at three-month follow-up, which was more profound among patients under 70 years old and with diabetes mellitus. At the six-month follow-up, there was no significant relationship between the radiological parameters and the DASH score. Conclusion: This study confirmed that radiological outcome affects the early patient-perceived outcome, with a more significant effect among patients under 70 and diabetics. Nonetheless, over time, there will be no significant relationship between the quality of reduction and patients' perceived outcomes. And this phenomenon requires further investigation.

Background and Objectives: On a local and national scale, genitourinary malformations (GUMs) are the second most encountered congenital anomaly in children. GUMs are linked to several risk factors, including maternal co-morbidities and insufficient folic acid. They may also be related to maternal health and care during pregnancy. Expanding our knowledge about these factors is necessary for the development of preventative measures, which could reduce GUM incidence. This study evaluated the local youth’s understanding and perceptions of genitourinary anomalies. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional, qualitative, anonymous, questionnaire-based study involved members of the local population, aged 18 years or over. Based on a 5% type I error rate (α = 0.05) and an 80% response rate, a sample size of 481 was determined. The questionnaire was completed by 902 people. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 25 (IBM). Results: Over half (57%) of respondents believed that hormonal therapy during pregnancy could increase GUM risk. Moreover, 46% thought that maternal chronic diseases could be another risk factor, while 43% believed that pregnancy-related conditions, such as pre-eclampsia, increased GUM risk. Women had higher odds of high perception scores than men, according to the univariate and multivariate analyses. Most participants (74%) strongly agreed that proper and ongoing prenatal follow-ups are necessary, 69% agreed that premarital medical check-ups are necessary, and 67% believed that optimal nutrition throughout pregnancy is necessary to reduce GUM risk. Conclusions: The results emphasize the necessity of developing healthcare strategies specifically designed to increase knowledge about GUMs and overcome incorrect community perceptions of risk factors that could also help improve attitudes towards prevention and ultimately reduce the incidence of GUMs.

Background: The restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with people’s avoidance of hospital exposure, led to a reduction in medical consultations and delays in care seeking. Numerous reports have shown a decrease in the number of appendectomies performed and an increased incidence of complicated appendicitis during the pandemic. We aimed to investigate these findings during and after the cessation of COVID-19-related restrictions. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a single centre, including consecutive adult patients who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis during three different periods: the pandemic cohort (7 March–30 June 2020), the post-pandemic cohort (7 March–30 June 2022) and the pre-pandemic control cohort (7 March–30 June 2019). A total of 103 patients were included and divided into the three cohorts. The patients’ demographics, clinical presentation, investigations, and operative data were compared. Results: The three groups did not differ significantly regarding demographics, clinical characteristics, or the number of appendectomies. However, a duration of symptoms at presentation of less than 2 days was significantly more frequent in the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic groups than the pandemic group (p = 0.001). The interval between admission and operation was significantly shorter in the post-pandemic group than in the pandemic group. The pandemic group also showed a higher incidence of complicated appendicitis compared to the others (p = 0.025). Conclusions: The termination of the COVID-19 pandemic and its related restrictions promoted the earlier presentation of acute appendicitis cases and lowered the incidence of complicated appendicitis. This emphasises the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on acute appendicitis.