Introduction Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a universally dreaded complication of any surgical procedure. The goal of this single-center study was to examine the issue of orthopaedic instrument wrapping defects with a focus on the importance of a high level of surveillance to enable identification of these defects in order to reduce the risk of instrument contamination. We also evaluated the impact on patient care, theatre staff, hospital finances and resource utilization during a defined study period in order to stimulate critical discussion and further research into potentially eliminating this problem via change in practice and advances in technology. To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first paper that looks at this problem from the above perspective within the United Kingdom National Health Service. Methods We conducted a prospective service evaluation project over a 30-week period from December 2021 to July 2022 across our three hospital sites within the United Kingdom National Health Service.We collated data on defects found in orthopaedic instrument wrappings as detected by visual inspection under ambient or theater lighting and the resulting surgical case cancellations. Defect types included in the study were all puncture holes, abrasions or tears visible to the naked eye irrespective of their size. Results A total of 601 orthopaedic sets were rejected during the study period due to defects identified in the sterile instrument wrappings. Of these, 437 were due to holes/tears in the wrapping, 129 were due to wet inner wrappings and 35 were due to insecure wrappings. This directly resulted in same-day cancellation of 13 surgical cases or 0.27% of booked cases with extra sets required for the other affected cases. These 13 cases could not proceed as they involved loan kits where no remedial action could be taken. Remedial action was required for the other 588 operation list cases affected by the sterile wrapping defects. The majority of the identified defects and resulting theatre case cancellations (61.5%) were in hip and knee arthroplasty surgery. The calculated potential financial loss due to these problems was £145,000 over the seven-month study period. This financial cost is equivalent to the best practice top-up tariff in England for treating approximately 108 hip fracture patientsbased on £1,335 per patient. Conclusion Our study identified defects in the sterile instrument wrappings affecting both the inner with or without involving theouter wrapping layerand resulting in cancellation of elective and trauma orthopaedic cases with resultant clinical and financial implications. There is a need to be more vigilant in identifying defects in drapes. Further research is warranted to improve ways of identifying defects in sterile wrappings and devise new protective mechanisms during sterilisation that can eliminate the use of sterile instrument wrappings.