Armitage Injury

[45HG 1,559]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-04-24/saints-unkind-cut-

And we think our docs are bad!

Negligence? Recklessness? Certainly off the ball and high impact - that doc should be out for at least a while.

One of the many bits I don't understand is that he is told the chances of infection from sporting surface is high, he has soil in his open wound which is then stitched up, and then told he was just unlucky!

[Chook 15,022]

What a sobering article. With the sheer number of germs out there in the world, I often find it a wonder that we all don't just die the first time we ever cut our skin open.

It's a credit to the immune system that we can recover from even the most minor injuries, and it's a MAJOR credit to human ingenuity that we can save people who suffer bigger injuries like this.

David Armitage would probably have died had this happened a few thousand years ago. In fact, he might have even died had this happened a hundred years ago.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Chook

[DeeSpencer 26,099]

What a sobering article. With the sheer number of germs out there in the world, I often find it a wonder that we all don't just die the first time we ever cut our skin open.

It's a credit to the immune system that we can recover from even the most minor injuries, and it's a MAJOR credit to human ingenuity that we can save people who suffer bigger injuries like this.

David Armitage would probably have died had this happened a few thousand years ago. In fact, he might have even died had this happened a hundred years ago.

I think it's fair to say that with the infection this deep if he had it before the invention of Penicillin (ie pre WWII) he would've been a serious chance of amputation and given all the associated risks with that it would've been very serious.

[DeeSpencer 26,099]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-04-24/saints-unkind-cut-

And we think our docs are bad!

Negligence? Recklessness? Certainly off the ball and high impact - that doc should be out for at least a while.

One of the many bits I don't understand is that he is told the chances of infection from sporting surface is high, he has soil in his open wound which is then stitched up, and then told he was just unlucky!

It was presumably washed out before they stitched it! They didn't just stitch it up and put some dressings over it!

However even small lacerations that need stitches need a lot of washing to get any bugs out especially when there's risk of anything dirty (ie. soil). In the haste to get him back on field the docs probably thought they'd cleaned it up enough and obviously this time they hadn't (or were unlucky). It's obviously a deeper wound than what they are used to and behind a knee is such a strange place that they probably aren't used to dealing with.

Remember players go off almost every game with the blood rule. So there's a lot of wounds that get attended to and occasionally they need stitches. But not many players end up in hospital. That's why he's unlucky.

[daisycutter 29,807]

a deep cut through to the knee bone

10 stitches

pain killing injection

mild concussion

.................and they send him back out to finish the game!............amazing decision for just a home and away game

[monoccular 17,614]

What a sobering article. With the sheer number of germs out there in the world, I often find it a wonder that we all don't just die the first time we ever cut our skin open.

It's a credit to the immune system that we can recover from even the most minor injuries, and it's a MAJOR credit to human ingenuity that we can save people who suffer bigger injuries like this.

David Armitage would probably have died had this happened a few thousand years ago. In fact, he might have even died had this happened a hundred years ago.

We don't die or even get infected every time we open our skin because usually (i) it is not deep and (ii) it is not usually simply stitched on the run so to speak if it is deep.

I must say it seems strange if the patella was exposed, and, according to the article (in a newspaper so it must be true!), he saw bits of grass and dirt embedded and it required 10 stitches that he was able / allowed to go back on. At very least one would hope that he would have the wound reviewed and possibly revised immediately after the game. A heavily contaminated wound such as this appears to have been would normally in addition attract a course of antibiotics.

He has indeed been very lucky.

It was presumably washed out before they stitched it! They didn't just stitch it up and put some dressings over it!

However even small lacerations that need stitches need a lot of washing to get any bugs out especially when there's risk of anything dirty (ie. soil). In the haste to get him back on field the docs probably thought they'd cleaned it up enough and obviously this time they hadn't (or were unlucky). It's obviously a deeper wound than what they are used to and behind a knee is such a strange place that they probably aren't used to dealing with.

Remember players go off almost every game with the blood rule. So there's a lot of wounds that get attended to and occasionally they need stitches. But not many players end up in hospital. That's why he's unlucky.

The patella is not behind the knee but in front!

The majority of wounds that get stitched are head or facial ones, which rarely get infected anyway. Deep ones on legs are always a significantly bigger risk.

Edited April 25, 2014 by monoccular