Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 14 of 14
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 54 - 54
2 May 2024
Potter M Uzoigwe C Azhar S Symes T
Full Access

Following the establishment of regional Major Trauma Networks in England in 2012, there were concerns that pressures regarding resource allocation in Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) may have a detrimental impact on the care of patients with hip fractures in these hospitals. This study aimed to compare outcomes in hip fracture care between MTCs and trauma units (TUs). National Hip Fracture Database data was extracted from 01/01/2015 to 31/12/2022 for all hospitals in England. Outcome measures included perioperative medical and physiotherapy assessments, time to surgery, consultant supervision in theatre, Best Practice Tariff (BPT) compliance, discharge to original residence, and mortality. Data was pooled and weighted for MTCs and remaining hospitals (TUs). A total of 487,089 patients with hip fractures were included from 167 hospitals (23 MTCs and 144 TUs). MTCs achieved marginally higher rates of orthogeriatrician assessment within 72 hours of admission (91.1% vs 90.4%, p<0.001) and mobilisation out of bed by first postoperative day (81.9% vs 79.7%, p<0.001). A lower proportion of patients underwent surgery by the day after admission in MTCs (65.2% vs 69.7%, p<0.001). However, there was significantly higher consultant surgeon and anaesthetist supervision rates during surgery in MTCs (71.8% vs 61.6%, p<0.001). There was poorer compliance with BPT criteria in MTCs (57.3% vs 60.4%, p<0.001), and proportionately fewer MTC patients were discharged to their original residence (63.5% vs 60.4%, p<0.001). There was no difference between MTCs and TUs in 30-day mortality (6.8% vs 6.8%, p=0.825). This study demonstrates that MTCs have greater difficulty in providing prompt surgery to hip fracture patients. However, their marginally superior perioperative care outcomes appear to compensate for this, as their mortality rates are similar to TUs. These findings suggest that the regionalisation of major trauma in England has not significantly compromised the overall care of hip fracture patients


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_10 | Pages 11 - 11
1 Aug 2021
Lukic J Rajeev A Tyas B Singisetti K
Full Access

Hip fractures in elderly patients are managed at both major trauma centers (MTC) and trauma units (TU). Previous evidence has demonstrated the importance of early surgery to reduce the morbidity and mortality related to the injury. The aim of this study is to compare the ‘time to theatre' and ‘30 day mortality' in TUs versus MTC in UK. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data on NHFD was performed. The average ‘time to theatre' in hours and ‘30 day mortality' of all hospitals were analysed between January and December 2018. Further subgroup analysis was done to check for any regional variations; in each instance a Shapiro-Wilk test was used to check for normal distribution, followed by a one-way ANOVA with a Tukey's post hoc test. Data from 158 hospitals in England (ENG), Wales (WAL) and Northern Ireland (NI) were used; 18 of which were MTC. There were 57,936 operative cases in TUs and 8606 in MTC's. The mean time (hours) to surgery from presentation was 32.51 and 32.64 for TUs and MTC respectively (p=0.513). There was no significant difference in ‘30 day mortality' (p=0.635) between TUs (6%) and 5.7% MTC's (5.7%), MTC's and TUs in ENG, WAL and NI (p=0.555), and MTC and WAL, NI and the different regions of ENG (p=0.209). A significant difference was observed, between the regional practice for TUs versus MTC's in ENG, WAL and NI (p=0.001) and between MTC's and TUs in WAL, NI and the different regions of ENG (p=0.001), with patients waiting significantly longer in NI for their procedure (mean=60.25 hours, p=0.001). There was no significant difference in time to surgery or 30 day mortality between TUs and MTC's, demonstrating comparable hip fracture care, despite MTCs need to prioritise more serious injuries


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 10 | Pages 766 - 775
13 Oct 2023
Xiang L Singh M McNicoll L Moppett IK

Aims. To identify factors influencing clinicians’ decisions to undertake a nonoperative hip fracture management approach among older people, and to determine whether there is global heterogeneity regarding these factors between clinicians from high-income countries (HIC) and low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Methods. A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was electronically distributed to clinicians around the world through the Fragility Fracture Network (FFN)’s Perioperative Special Interest Group and clinicians’ personal networks between 24 May and 25 July 2021. Analyses were performed using Excel and STATA v16.0. Between-group differences were determined using independent-samples t-tests and chi-squared tests. Results. A total of 406 respondents from 51 countries answered the questionnaire, of whom 225 came from HIC and 180 from LMIC. Clinicians from HIC reported a greater median and mean estimated proportion of admitted patients with hip fracture undergoing surgery (median 96% (interquartile range (IQR) 95% to 99%); mean 94% (SD 8%)) than those from LMIC (median 85% (IQR 75% to 95%); mean 81% (SD 16%); p < 0.001). Global heterogeneity seems to exist regarding factors such as anticipated life expectancy, insufficient resources, ability to pay, treatment costs, and perception of risk in hip fracture management decision-making. Conclusion. This study represents the first international sampling of clinician perspectives regarding nonoperative hip fracture management. Several factors seemed to influence the clinician decision-making process. Further research is needed to inform the development of best practice guidelines to improve decision-making and the quality of hip fracture care among older people. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):766–775


Aims. Delirium is associated with adverse outcomes following hip fracture, but the prevalence and significance of delirium for the prognosis and ongoing rehabilitation needs of patients admitted from home is less well studied. Here, we analyzed relationships between delirium in patients admitted from home with 1) mortality; 2) total length of hospital stay; 3) need for post-acute inpatient rehabilitation; and 4) hospital readmission within 180 days. Methods. This observational study used routine clinical data in a consecutive sample of hip fracture patients aged ≥ 50 years admitted to a single large trauma centre during the COVID-19 pandemic between 1 March 2020 and 30 November 2021. Delirium was prospectively assessed as part of routine care by the 4 A’s Test (4AT), with most assessments performed in the emergency department. Associations were determined using logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile, COVID-19 infection within 30 days, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade. Results. A total of 1,821 patients were admitted, with 1,383 (mean age 79.5 years; 72.1% female) directly from home. Overall, 87 patients (4.8%) were excluded due to missing 4AT scores. Delirium prevalence in the whole cohort was 26.5% (460/1,734): 14.1% (189/1,340) in the subgroup of patients admitted from home, and 68.8% (271/394) in the remaining patients (comprising care home residents and inpatients when fracture occurred). In patients admitted from home, delirium was associated with a 20-day longer total length of stay (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, delirium was associated with higher mortality at 180 days (odds ratio (OR) 1.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.54); p = 0.013), requirement for post-acute inpatient rehabilitation (OR 2.80 (95% CI 1.97 to 3.96); p < 0.001), and readmission to hospital within 180 days (OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.02 to 3.15); p = 0.041). Conclusion. Delirium affects one in seven patients with a hip fracture admitted directly from home, and is associated with adverse outcomes in these patients. Delirium assessment and effective management should be a mandatory part of standard hip fracture care. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(6):447–456


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 9 | Pages 530 - 540
4 Sep 2020
Arafa M Nesar S Abu-Jabeh H Jayme MOR Kalairajah Y

Aims. The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic forced an unprecedented period of challenge to the NHS in the UK where hip fractures in the elderly population are a major public health concern. There are approximately 76,000 hip fractures in the UK each year which make up a substantial proportion of the trauma workload of an average orthopaedic unit. This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hip fracture care service and the emerging lessons to withstand any future outbreaks. Methods. Data were collected retrospectively on 157 hip fractures admitted from March to May 2019 and 2020. The 2020 group was further subdivided into COVID-positive and COVID-negative. Data including the four-hour target, timing to imaging, hours to operation, anaesthetic and operative details, intraoperative complications, postoperative reviews, COVID status, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), length of stay, postoperative complications, and the 30-day mortality were compiled from computer records and our local National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) export data. Results. Hip fractures and inpatient falls significantly increased by 61.7% and 7.2% respectively in the 2020 group. A significant difference was found among the three groups regarding anaesthetic preparation time, anaesthetic time, and recovery time. The mortality rate in the 2020 COVID-positive group (36.8%) was significantly higher than both the 2020 COVID-negative and 2019 groups (11.5% and 11.7% respectively). The hospital stay was significantly higher in the COVID-positive group (mean of 24.21 days (SD 19.29)). Conclusion. COVID-19 has had notable effects on the hip fracture care service: hip fracture rates increased significantly. There were inefficiencies in theatre processes for which we have recommended the use of alternate theatres. COVID-19 infection increased the 30-day mortality and hospital stay in hip fractures. More research needs to be done to reduce this risk. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:530–540


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 5 | Pages 881 - 887
1 May 2021
Griffin XL Achten J Parsons N Costa ML

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine whether national standards of best practice are associated with improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in hip fracture patients. Methods. This was a multicentre cohort study conducted in 20 acute UK NHS hospitals treating hip fracture patients. Patients aged ≥ 60 years treated operatively for a hip fracture were eligible for inclusion. Regression models were fitted to each of the “Best Practice Tariff” indicators and overall attainment. The impact of attainment on HRQoL was assessed by quantifying improvement in EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) from estimated regression model coefficients. Results. A total of 6,532 patients provided both baseline and four-month EQ-5D-5L, of whom 1,060 participants had died at follow-up. Best practice was achieved in the care of 57% of participants; there was no difference in age, cognitive ability, and mobility at baseline for the overall attainment and non-attainment groups. Attaining at least ‘joint care by surgeon and orthogeriatrician’, ‘delirium assessment’, and ‘falls assessment’ was associated with a large, clinically relevant increase in four months EQ-5D-5L of 0.094 (bootstrapped 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.046 to 0.146). Conclusion. National standards with enhanced remuneration in hip fracture care results in improvement in individual patients’ HRQoL. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):881–887


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 13 - 13
1 Apr 2022
Wong E Malik-Tabassum K Chan G Ahmed M Harman H Chernov A Rogers B
Full Access

The ‘Best Practice Tariff‘ (BPT) was developed to improve hip fracture care by incentivising hospitals to provide timely multidisciplinary care to patients sustaining these injuries. The current literature examining the association between BPT and patient outcomes is conflicting and underpowered. We aimed to determine if achieving BPT has an impact on 30-day mortality and postoperative length of stay. A retrospective analysis for patients admitted to a major trauma centre (MTC) was performed between 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2020. Data were extracted from the National Hip Fracture Database. The study population was divided into two groups: those who achieved all BPT criteria (BPT-passed) and those who did not (BPT-failed). The primary outcomes of interest included the 30-day mortality rate and postoperative length of stay (LOS). As a secondary objective, we aimed to assess factors that predict perioperative mortality by utilising a logistic regression model. 4397 cases were included for analysis. 3422 (78%) met the BPT criteria, whereas 973 (22%) did not. The mean LOS in the BPT-achieving group was 17.2 days compared with 18.6 in the BPT-failed group, p<0.001. 30-day mortality was significantly lower in the BPT-achieving group i.e., 4.3% in BPT-achieved vs. 12.1% in BPT-failed, p<0.001. Logistic regression modelling demonstrated that attainment of BPT was associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality (OR: 0.32; 95% CI:0.24–0.41; p<0.001). To our knowledge, this is the largest study to investigate the association between BPT attainment and 30-day mortality as well as the length of stay. The present study demonstrates that achieving BPT in hip fracture patients is associated with a significant reduction in the average length of stay and 30-day mortality rates. Our crude calculations revealed that achieving BPT for 3422 patients earned our hospital trust >£4 million over 8 years. Findings from this study suggest that achieving BPT not only improves 30-day survival in patients with hip fractures but also aids cost-effectiveness by reducing LOS and helps generate NHS Trusts a significant amount of financial reward


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 9 | Pages 710 - 720
1 Sep 2021
Kjaervik C Gjertsen J Engeseter LB Stensland E Dybvik E Soereide O

Aims. This study aimed to describe preoperative waiting times for surgery in hip fracture patients in Norway, and analyze factors affecting waiting time and potential negative consequences of prolonged waiting time. Methods. Overall, 37,708 hip fractures in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register from January 2014 to December 2018 were linked with data in the Norwegian Patient Registry. Hospitals treating hip fractures were characterized according to their hip fracture care. Waiting time (hours from admission to start of surgery), surgery within regular working hours, and surgery on the day of or on the day after admission, i.e. ‘expedited surgery’ were estimated. Results. Mean waiting time was 22.6 hours (SD 20.7); 36,652 patients (97.2%) waited less than three days (< 72 hours), and 27,527 of the patients (73%) were operated within regular working hours (08:00 to 16:00). Expedited surgery was given to 31,675 of patients (84%), and of these, 19,985 (53%) were treated during regular working hours. Patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes 4 and 5 were more likely to have surgery within regular working hours (odds ratio (OR) 1.59; p < 0.001), and less likely to receive expedited surgery than ASA 1 patients (OR 0.29; p < 0.001). Low-volume hospitals treated a larger proportion of patients during regular working hours than high volume hospitals (OR 1.26; p < 0.001). High-volume hospitals had less expedited surgery and significantly longer waiting times than low and intermediate-low volume hospitals. Higher ASA classes and Charlson Comorbidity Index increased waiting time. Patients not receiving expedited surgery had higher 30-day and one-year mortality rates (OR 1.19; p < 0.001) and OR 1.13; p < 0.001), respectively. Conclusion. There is inequality in waiting time for hip fracture treatment in Norway. Variations in waiting time from admission to hip fracture surgery depended on both patient and hospital factors. Not receiving expedited surgery was associated with increased 30-day and one-year mortality rates. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):710–720


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 8 | Pages 500 - 507
18 Aug 2020
Cheruvu MS Bhachu DS Mulrain J Resool S Cool P Ford DJ Singh RA

Aims. Our rural orthopaedic service has undergone service restructure during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to sustain hip fracture care. All adult trauma care has been centralised to the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital for assessment and medical input, before transferring those requiring operative intervention to the Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital. We aim to review the impact of COVID-19 on hip fracture workload and service changes upon management of hip fractures. Methods. We reviewed our prospectively maintained trust database and National Hip Fracture Database records for the months of March and April between the years 2016 and 2020. Our assessment included fracture pattern (intrascapular vs extracapsular hip fracture), treatment intervention, length of stay and mortality. Results. We treated 288 patients during March and April between 2016 and 2020, with a breakdown of 55, 58, 53, 68, and 54 from 2016 to 2020 respectively. Fracture pattern distribution in the pre-COVID-19 years of 2016 to 2019 was 58% intracapsular and 42% extracapsular. In 2020 (COVID-19 period) the fracture patterns were 65% intracapsular and 35% extracapsular. Our mean length of stay was 13.1 days (SD 8.2) between 2016 to 2019, and 5.0 days (6.3) days in 2020 (p < 0.001). Between 2016 and 2019 we had three deaths in hip fracture patients, and one death in 2020. Hemiarthroplasty and dynamic hip screw fixation have been the mainstay of operative intervention across the five years and this has continued in the COVID-19 period. We have experienced a rise in conservatively managed patients; ten in 2020 compared to 14 over the previous four years. Conclusion. There has not been a reduction in the number of hip fractures during COVID-19 period compared to the same time period over previous years. In our experience, there has been an increase in conservative treatment and decreased length of stay during the COVID -19 period. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:500–507


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_5 | Pages 6 - 6
1 Jul 2020
Hall A Holt G
Full Access

Background. National hip fracture programmes are becoming widespread, but this practice is nascent and varied. The Scottish Hip Fracture Audit (SHFA) was an early adopter of this strategy and is credited with substantial systemic improvements in quality and outcomes. Objectives. To provide evidence and incentive to clinicians and administrators to adopt successful improvement strategies, and to facilitate data-driven change hip fracture care. Study Design and Methods. We reviewed the practice of seven national hip fracture improvement programmes in: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Scotland, and Ireland. We report our experience from the SHFA and describe: the results of our programme; challenges and learning points encountered, and successful strategies for implementing change. Results. There is variance in approach to data collection and reporting, for example: standalone programmes versus combined trauma and arthroplasty registries; annual trend reporting versus ‘snapshot’ or real-time information; population-level versus patient-level data, and the emphasis placed on service-level characteristics. The governance model also varies – some act as a passive data registry whereas others act as active agents of change and regulation. There is consensus on the key performance makers: prompt admission; early surgery and mobilisation, and a multidisciplinary approach. There have been significant challenges encountered by the SHFA with respect to funding, logistical, and political issues. Analysis of the effects of our programme have demonstrated its clinical efficacy, and has identified successful strategies for improvement. We describe this experience. Conclusions. The establishment of national audit programmes has resulted in significant improvements in quality, efficiency, and outcomes. This study of major national programmes provides evidence, incentive, and instruction to clinicians and administrators who seek to improve healthcare systems


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_5 | Pages 9 - 9
1 Jul 2020
Uzoigwe C Mostafa A Middleton R
Full Access

Background. In a number of disciplines, positive correlations have been reported between volume and clinical outcome. This has helped drive the evolution of specialist centres to deal with complex or high risk medical conditions. Hip fractures are a common injury associated with high morbidity and mortality. Aim. To assess whether volume of hip fracture cases attended to by individual hospitals is associated with the quality of care provided and clinical outcomes. Methods. Utilising 19 quality of care measures espoused by NICE and available on the National Hip Fracture Database website, we examined whether there was a correlation between Volume of hip fractures per institution and each outcome measure for 2016 and 2018. Outcomes were assessed for normality of distribution and correlated using either Spearman rank or Pearson Correlation as appropriate. Results. Over 170 institutions were available for analysis. The average number of procedures per institution was 371 (sd 154) in 2016 and 378 (sd 158) in 2018. 9 units attended to in excess of 700 cases per annum. There was a positive correlation between volume of cases and a number of quality of care indices; notably survivorship, length of stay, ortho-geriatric consultation, pressure ulcer prevention, post-operative mobilisation, delirium prevention, bone health assessment and the proportion of patients satisfying the Best Practice Tariff (BPT) criteria. 5 of the measures had no correlation. The worst performances were observed for measures that were not financially incentivised. Discussion. Our analysis of a large synchronous national dataset show weak but favourable correlations with unit volume and important outcomes including mortality and length of stay. Our results do not invariably justify the centralisation of hip fracture services. Hip fracture care may be more convincingly improved by promoting compliance to the guidance that already exists via financial incentivisation or otherwise


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 12 | Pages 924 - 932
23 Dec 2022
Bourget-Murray J Horton I Morris J Bureau A Garceau S Abdelbary H Grammatopoulos G

Aims

The aims of this study were to determine the incidence and factors for developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hemiarthroplasty (HA) for hip fracture, and to evaluate treatment outcome and identify factors associated with treatment outcome.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients treated for HA PJI at a tertiary referral centre with a mean 4.5 years’ follow-up (1.6 weeks to 12.9 years). Surgeries performed included debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and single-stage revision. The effect of different factors on developing infection and treatment outcome was determined.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 12 - 12
1 May 2019
Davies P Mayne A Milton J Kelly K Mackinnon F Simpson J
Full Access

Introduction. The number of hip fracture admissions is rising; with reduced hospital bed capacity and increasing patient numbers, care pathways must be optimised to maximise inpatient bed efficiency. There is currently significant interest in improving healthcare services across all 7 days in the United Kingdom. It is unclear whether lack of allied healthcare professional review at the weekend is detrimental to hip fracture patient care. This study aims to examine whether providing 7-day physiotherapy and occupational therapy (7DPOT) service improves outcomes for fractured neck of femur patients compared to a 5-day service (5DPOT). Methods. All patients admitted with an acute neck of femur fracture were grouped into three cohorts, depending on provision of 7DPOT services: the initial cohort received 5DPOT between December 2012 and March 2013. Seven-day physiotherapy and occupational therapy was introduced for one year from October 2014 until September 2015 (2. nd. cohort). The service then reverted to 5DPOT between January to June 2016 (3. rd. cohort). The third cohort was utilised to nullify changes in the overall service which had occurred which were not attributable to 7DPOT. Data was collected prospectively using a specially designed audit tool. Results. 580 patients were included, with 533 patients followed out to 120 days. Introduction of 7DPOT saw improvement of documented first mobilisation with a physiotherapist from mean 1.38 days to 0.98 days (p<0.05). No significant differences were seen in inpatient length of stay between the three groups or when comparing all 5DPOT to 7DPOT. Use of 7DPOT did not lead to significant differences in initial discharge location. Mortality at 120-day follow up was observed to improve over time but was not attributable to 7DPOT. Conclusion. This study has not shown any significant improvement in outcomes for hip fracture patients receiving 7DPOT compared 5DPOT. Given the current financial constraints on healthcare services, widespread adoption cannot be recommended


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 5 | Pages 888 - 897
3 May 2021
Hall AJ Clement ND MacLullich AMJ White TO Duckworth AD

Aims

The primary aim was to determine the influence of COVID-19 on 30-day mortality following hip fracture. Secondary aims were to determine predictors of COVID-19 status on presentation and later in the admission; the rate of hospital acquired COVID-19; and the predictive value of negative swabs on admission.

Methods

A nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients presenting with a hip fracture to 17 Scottish centres in March and April 2020. Demographics, presentation blood tests, COVID-19 status, Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, management, length of stay, and 30-day mortality were recorded.