Page 25 of 26

OR1.1-6 | Skeletal Trauma and Polytrauma Principles — Assignment

CLINICAL SCENARIO

This assignment develops your ability to apply polytrauma principles to a real clinical scenario. You will analyse a multiply-injured patient, apply ATLS-based triage and resuscitation logic, classify injuries using validated systems, and construct a management plan that integrates shock treatment, soft tissue care, and dislocation management. The task reinforces the intersection of OR1.1–OR1.5 competencies and mirrors the decision-making expected of a newly qualified doctor at any emergency-equipped hospital.

Instructions

Read the following case vignette carefully. Then complete each of the four sections below in your own words. Use standard references (Maheshwari, Apley and Solomon, ATLS manual) to support your reasoning.

CASE VIGNETTE: A 26-year-old male motorcyclist is brought to the emergency department 20 minutes after a road traffic accident. Bystanders report he was not wearing a helmet and was thrown off the vehicle at speed. On arrival: GCS 12/15, BP 88/58 mmHg, HR 136/min, RR 30/min, SpO2 93% on oxygen via face mask. There is a 4 cm open wound on the left tibia with visible bone end and moderate soil contamination. The left lower limb is held in flexion, adduction, and internal rotation, shortened, with absent knee reflexes. No active external bleeding is identified.

Step 1. Review the vignette and identify all life-threatening and limb-threatening injuries in order of priority. Use the ATLS primary survey ABCDE framework to structure your answer.

Step 2. Classify the patient's haemodynamic status using the ATLS classification of haemorrhagic shock. Justify your classification with the clinical data given, and outline the immediate fluid resuscitation strategy.

Step 3. Classify the open tibial wound using the Gustilo-Anderson system. State the antibiotic regimen (drug, route, timing) recommended for this fracture class, and explain the importance of adhering to the 1-hour antibiotic rule.

Step 4. Describe the likely dislocation of the hip. Identify the nerve at risk, describe its clinical deficit, and outline the steps you would take to reduce this dislocation, including pre-procedure checks and post-reduction assessment.

Length: 600–900 words

What to Submit

Section 1: ATLS Primary Survey — Prioritised Problem List

Guidance: Use the A-B-C-D-E framework. For each letter, state what you find in this patient and what immediate intervention is required. Clearly separate immediate life threats (e.g., airway, breathing compromise, haemorrhage) from deferred concerns (fracture fixation, imaging). Approximately 150–200 words.

Section 2: Haemorrhagic Shock — Classification and Resuscitation

Guidance: State the ATLS Class (I–IV) with the specific vital signs that place this patient in that class. Describe your immediate resuscitation: IV access, fluid choice, volume, blood product triggers (MTP criteria), and monitoring targets (HR <100, MAP >65, UO >0.5 mL/kg/hr). Note likely internal blood loss sources (pelvic fracture risk, femoral shaft, retroperitoneal). Approximately 150–180 words.

Section 3: Open Fracture — Gustilo-Anderson Classification and Antibiotic Protocol

Guidance: Classify the wound (Type I / II / IIIA / IIIB / IIIC) with brief justification. State: (a) first-line IV antibiotic, dose, and route for this class; (b) additional cover for soil contamination; (c) the rationale for the 1-hour antibiotic rule with evidence on infection rate reduction; (d) wound management principles (irrigation volume, debridement timing). Approximately 150 words.

Section 4: Hip Dislocation — Diagnosis, Nerve Risk, and Reduction

Guidance: Identify the direction of dislocation from the posture described. Name the nerve at risk and describe its deficit (motor and sensory). Outline: (a) pre-reduction steps (imaging, analgesia/anaesthesia, neurovascular documentation); (b) reduction technique (Allis manoeuvre or equivalent); (c) post-reduction assessment (neurovascular repeat, imaging to confirm concentric reduction, AVN prevention — reduce within 6 hours). Approximately 150–180 words.

Grading Rubric — Skeletal Trauma and Polytrauma Principles Assignment Rubric

Criterion	Points	Full-marks descriptor
ATLS Primary Survey Application (Section 1)	10 pts	Correctly applies ABCDE framework; identifies all life threats in correct priority; links each finding to a specific intervention; no incorrect priorities.
Haemorrhagic Shock Classification and Resuscitation Plan (Section 2)	10 pts	Correct ATLS class stated with full justification of all vital signs; appropriate resuscitation strategy including blood product triggers and monitoring targets; internal haemorrhage sources identified.
Gustilo-Anderson Classification and Antibiotic Management (Section 3)	10 pts	Correct Gustilo-Anderson type (IIIB) with brief justification; correct antibiotic regimen (cefazolin + aminoglycoside + penicillin G for soil contamination); 1-hour rule correctly stated with mechanistic rationale.
Hip Dislocation Management — Nerve Risk, Reduction Technique, and Post-Reduction Care (Section 4)	10 pts	Correct identification of posterior hip dislocation from posture; sciatic nerve deficit (foot drop + dorsum sensory loss) correctly described; complete pre-reduction, reduction technique, and post-reduction protocol including AVN prevention within 6 hours.
Clinical Reasoning Quality and Reference Accuracy	10 pts	Responses are evidence-based, logically structured, and consistent with ATLS/Maheshwari standards; no factual errors; clear cause-and-effect reasoning throughout.

PEER REVIEW

Read your peer's assignment against the rubric criteria. For each of the five sections/criteria: (1) Note one specific strength — a fact, reasoning step, or clinical decision that is particularly well-handled. (2) Note one specific improvement — a factual gap, missing element, or logical inconsistency with a suggested correction. Be specific and respectful. Avoid vague comments like 'good work' or 'needs improvement' — cite the specific clinical element you are commenting on. Your feedback will be reviewed by the faculty.