Background. Polypharmacy of elderly trauma patients entails further difficulties in addition to the fracture treatment. Impaired renal function, altered metabolism and drugs that are potentially delirious or inhibit ossification, are only a few examples which must be carefully considered for the medication in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to investigate, if medication errors could be prevented by orthogeriatric comanagement compared to conventional trauma treatment. Material and methods. In a superregional traumacenter based on two locations in Munich, all patients ≥ 70 years with proximal femur fracture were consecutively recorded in a period of 3 months. After the end of the treatment the medical records of each patient were analyzed. At the hospital location 1 the treatment was carried out without orthogeriatric comanagement, at the hospital location 2 with this concept (DGU-certified orthogeriatric center). In addition to the basic medication all newly added drugs were recorded as well as changes in the medication plan and also wether treatment was carried out by the geriatrician or the trauma surgeon. Based on the START / STOPP criteria for the medication of geriatric patients, we defined “no-go” drugs with the geriatrician of the orthogeriatric center which should be avoided in the orthogeriatric patient (including benzodiazepines, gyrase inhibitors, NSAID like Ibuprofen with impaired GFR). The statistical analysis was done with the chi-square-test (IBM SPSS Statistics 24). Results and conclusion. A total of 46 patients were included, 37 of them female and 9 male with an average age of 84,5 years (SD±6.8). At the location without a geriatrician (18 patients), a prescription of one or more “no-go” drugs was found in 9 patients, whereas in location 2 (28 patients) only in 3 patients (p=0.003). Besides that, at the location with the geriatrician, a change in the medication was made for 17 patients during their stay in hospital. This shows that with the fixed integration of the geriatrician into the trauma surgical team, errors in the medication of the patients could be significantly more frequent avoided or faster detected and corrected. Although this should not limit the responsibility of the rest of the team, there is no doubt about the importance of the interdisciplinary treatment of elderly trauma patients

Aims

Performance indicators are increasingly used to evaluate the quality of healthcare provided to patients with a hip fracture. The aim of this review was to map the variety of performance indicators used around the world and how they are defined.

The National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) started collecting data on peri-prosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF) in December 2019. We reviewed the data from the first year of data collection to describe the patients being admitted with PPFF and the care they received according to established Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used in hip fracture surgery. We performed a retrospective review of the NHFD between 1 January and 31 December 2020. Analyses consisted of the summary statistics used to generate the NHFD annual report. Of the KPIs used in hip fracture, data were available for PPFF on time to assessment by a geriatrician (KPI 1), time to theatre (if applicable) (KPI 2), and mobilisation the day after surgery (if applicable) (KPI 4). There were 2,411 PPFF fractures around a hip or knee replacement reported out of a total of 2,606 PPFF. Of the 171 hospitals reporting data to the NHFD, 135 reported at least one. The median number of fractures per hospital was 14 (IQR 8, 25, range 1 to 110). The median age of patients was 84 (range 60 to 104) and 1,604 (67%) patients were female. Of the 1,850 occasions a time to geriatrician review was documented, review within 72 hours was achieved on 89.2% of occasions. Of the 1,973 patients who underwent operative interventions, 546 patients went to theatre before the 36-hour target (28.4%). Of patients who had surgery 1,323 (67.4%) were mobilised the following day. In the first year collecting data on PPFF we can give the first idea of the incidence of these life changing injuries. Whilst geriatrician review with 72 hours was achieved in a high proportion of cases nationally, our data suggest fewer patients are mobilised the day after surgery. Notably, only 28.4% of patients who were managed operatively went to theatre within 36 hours of admission. We provide the first insight into the incidence and management of these injuries

Aims. In this study, we aimed to determine whether designation as a major trauma centre (MTC) affects the quality of care for patients with a fracture of the hip. . Patients and Methods. All patients in the United Kingdom National Hip Fracture Database, between April 2010 and December 2013, were included. The indicators of quality that were recorded included the time to arrival on an orthopaedic ward, to review by a geriatrician, and to operation. The clinical outcomes were the development of a pressure sore, discharge home, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and re-operation within 30 days. . Results. There were 289 466 patients, 49 350 (17%) of whom were treated in hospitals that are now MTCs. Using multivariable logistic and generalised linear regression models, there were no significant differences in any of the indicators of the quality of care or clinical outcomes between MTCs, hospitals awaiting MTC designation and non-MTC hospitals. Conclusion. These findings suggest that the regionalisation of major trauma in England did not improve or compromise the overall care of elderly patients with a fracture of the hip. Take home message: There is no evidence that reconfiguring major trauma services in England disrupted the treatment of older adults with a fracture of the hip. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:414–19

For some years, there has been vast international interest in creating models for joint efforts between geriatricians and orthopedic surgeons. We present data from two such models. For the first time in Denmark, the Department of Orthopedics Bispebjerg University Hospital (BUP) recruited two full-time geriatricians in September 2009. They were assigned an independent unit meant for severely ill orthopaedic patients with high comorbidity and polypharmacy. These two geriatricians had, during the previous two years, consulted another orthopaedic department at Gentofte University Hospital (GUH) in a neighbouring community three times a week. The aim of their intervention was then to optimize treatment for comorbidity, to clarify indication of acute fall-assessment, osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment, presence of delirium and dementia. Methods. A total of 1344 hip fracture patients (age 70 years) divided into three populations were included in this study. Mortality data were collected from the Danish Civil Registry. Population 1 (P1), n = 645 was included at GUH from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2007. During the entire period, the patients had access to a senior consultant in geriatric medicine three times a week. In this population, the majority of patients were assessed for dementia (n = 636), delirium (n = 627) and Barthel Index (Barthel100) at admission (n = 394). Population 2 (P2), n = 381 included at BUH from September 1, 2009 until July 8, 2010 with orthogeriatric access. Population 3 (P3), n = 318 were included at BUH from September 28, 2008 until August 31, 2009 with no orthogeriatric access. Age mean (SD): P1 84.7 (6.8), P2 85.5 (7.3), P3 85.3 (14.3) P = 0.1(ANOVA) Sex ratio: females/males: P1 0.73/0.27, P2 0.80/0.20, P3 0.75/0.25 P = 0.09 Chi square). Results. In-hospital mortality rate: P1 4.8%, P2 6.3%, P3 9.1% P = 0.03 (Chi square). Three month mortality: In P1 dementia, delirium and Barthel Index (below 50 versus above 50) were all strong predictors: No dementia: 53/383 (13.8%) versus dementia present 68/253 (26.9%) died, P = 0001 (log-rank test). No delirium 69/456 (15.1%) versus delirium present 47/171 (27.5%) died F = 0.0004 (log-rank test) Barthel Index 50 38/372 (10.2%) versus Barthel<50 7/22 (31.8%) died P = 0.0004. Conclusion. This paper reports data from two different models with orthogeriatric service. Our data present delirium, dementia and Barthel Index to be very strong predictors for three month mortality (P1). Despite the time needed to implement a new orthogeriatric unit and the fact that the geriatricians only assessed a proportion of hip fracture patients, in-hospital mortality was reduced significantly for the total hip-fracture population (P2) within the first 10 months

Introduction. In the orthogeriatric model of care, orthopaedic surgeons, geriatricians, anesthesiologists, physiotherapists and the nursing staff work together with the aim to optimize the outcomes of vulnerable older patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. It is recommended that the orthogeriatric care of hip fracture patients should be based on systematic treatment guidelines. We describe here how operative and perioperative management of hip fracture patients changed between the first and the second year after initiation of orthogeriatric collaboration. Method. Data on all patients aged 65 years or over and experiencing a hip fracture between September 1st 2007 and August 31st 2009 were prospectively collected in a Finnish hospital district with a total of 200,000 inhabitants. The patients were evaluated 4–6 months postoperatively at the geriatric outpatient clinic. Starting from the second year, geriatrician's rounds 2–3 times a week at the orthopaedic ward were provided. In addition, a systematic treatment protocol agreed by orthopaedic surgeons, geriatricians and anesthesiologists was introduced to the hospital staff responsible for the care of hip fracture patients. Results. Data were available on 177 patients in the first and 232 patients in the second year (87 % and 95 % of eligible patients, respectively). There were no significant differences in the patient characteristics in regard with age, sex distribution, prefracture mobility level, living arrangements, number of medication used, body mass index, anesthesiological risk score or the type of the fracture between the two years. Compared to the first year, the patients were more likely to be operated by a consultant orthopaedic surgeon (74 % vs. 49 %, p<0.001) and to undergo hemiarthroplasty (64 % vs. 53 %, p=0.013) during the second year. Urinary catheters were also removed before discharge from the orthopaedic ward more frequently (28 % vs. 14 %, p=0.001). There was a trend towards shorter delay to operation (<24 hours in 40 % vs. 32 %, p=0.140) and more frequent use of blood transfusions (39 % vs. 32 %, p=0.128). There was no difference in the mean length of stay at the orthopaedic ward between the two years (6 days in the first vs. 7 days in the second year, p=0.081). The 4-month mortality was 20 % in the first and 17 % in the second year (p=0.436). Conclusions. The treatment practices showed changes towards guideline recommendations after initiation of orthogeriatric collaboration in the care of hip fracture patients without increasing the length of stay at the orthopaedic ward. Further follow-up is required to show how these improvements translate into longer-term outcomes and mortality

The 2011 National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) Report has shown our institute has the fewest number of patients meeting the 36-hour target to theatre in the UK (9%) but well above the national average for review by geriatrician (42.5%) at 76%. We believe our timely medical input means patients' are more physiologically normalised prior to surgery. We aimed to review our postoperative results to see if our patients had significantly different morbidity and mortality compared to the rest of the UK. We reviewed 152 patients between the period September 2009 and September 2010. All of the patients were prospectively identified and their information was added to our hip fracture database. Using the auditing software we reviewed the patients' outcomes and compared them to national averages using figures from the NHFD. Of the 152 patients identified 13% met the 36-hour target. The average time to theatre for the study group was 89 hours. 83% of the group had a pre-operative assessment by a geriatrician. The primary reason for surgical delay was a lack of space on a theatre list (61.2%) followed by being medical unfit (16.4%). The average length of acute hospital stay was 16.4 days matching the national average while 30 Day mortality at 7.9% was (0.5%) lower than NHFD figures. We continue to try and improve our time to surgery for hip fracture patients and accept this is mostly related to limited theatre access. Deficient resources due to Northern Ireland's exclusion from the best practice tariff means we are unable to compete with the top performing units in the NHFD. While it makes humanitarian sense to expedite surgery, evidence used to determine the 36-hour target is quoted as “low quality” or “very low quality”. Our data shows no significant difference in outcomes compared to national figures

Literature suggests that joint orthopaedic and geriatric care, and geriatric orthopaedic rehabilitation units, would provide best care for fractured neck of femur (NOF) patients. These are often elderly frail patients with concurrent illnesses and co-morbidities who also have a fracture. There is to date no quantitative data. This completed audit quantifies the care provided on the orthopaedic wards in the first phase solely by orthopaedic team, and in the repeat phase with additional regular geriatric input from an orthogeriatric senior house officer (SHO) and consultant geriatrician ward rounds. A retrospective audit of fractured NOF patients admitted to acute orthopaedic wards under orthopaedics and treated operatively. The first phase analysed 72 patients with sole orthopaedic care. The repeat phase analysed 25 patients after the introduction of an orthogeriatric SHO and geriatric ward rounds. The first audit phase of orthopaedic care alone found that 50% of patients were reviewed each day of the first post op seven-day week. The mean number of reviews in the post-op week was three. A total of 58% patients were operated on the next day. A minority never had post-op bloods or x-rays prior to discharge from the acute bed. Ad hoc medical input by referral occurred in 50% of patients. The repeat audit of combined orthogeriatric care found that 75% of patients were reviewed each day in the post-op week. The mean number of reviews in the post-op week rose to five. Similar to the first phase, 59% proceeded to next day surgery with combined care. All patients had timely bloods and x-rays before discharge from the acute bed. Medical input rose to 80% due to regular ward rounds, and ad hoc referrals decreased in quantity whilst increased in quality. Length of stay and mortality were reduced. The clinical risk of fractured NOF patients was reduced on the appointment of an orthogeriatric SHO in combination with formal reviews by consultant geriatrician. Further models of care are being evaluated. This audit adds evidence that joint care is better for these usually elderly and co-morbid patients

Aims

The Peri-Implant and PeriProsthetic Survival AnalysiS (PIPPAS) study aimed to investigate the risk factors for one-year mortality of femoral peri-implant fractures (FPIFs).

In the UK, multidisciplinary teamwork for patients with hip fracture has been shown to reduce mortality and improves health-related quality of life for patients, while also reducing hospital bed days and associated healthcare costs. However, despite rapidly increasing numbers of fragility fractures, multidisciplinary shared care is rare in low- and middle-income countries around the world. The HIPCARE trial will test the introduction of multidisciplinary care pathways in five low- and middle-income countries in South and Southeast Asia, with the aim to improve patients’ quality of life and reduce healthcare costs.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1369–1371.

We have a national UK database for hip fracture outcome. It has been developed synchronously with an agreed care pathway that is multi-disciplinary, including surgeons, anaesthetists, geriatricians, osteoporosis experts, healthcare managers and lay charities. Care has been improved and audit established for future evolution. The database started in 2007 and now includes 85 units. The synchronous care pathway deals with falls and osteoporosis prevention, perioperative multi-disciplinary care, rehabilitation and outcome results. Key issues are avoidance of delay and cancellation of surgery and how we deal with patients with medical co-morbidities. Outcome is analysed prospectively to take account of co-morbidities and variations in surgical techniques. The care pathway and data base are now universally accepted as a national priority with advice for all UK trauma units to participate. Of the 121 registered units, only 85 actively contribute data. The cost and staff needs for data input are now accepted. To date, 12,983 clinical cases have been entered. Variation of trauma theatre list operating time per head of population and other related resource has been highlighted. This has been accepted by politicians and health managers. The NHS Institute of Improvement has started a rapid improvement plan to support units with poor resource/audit outcome. It is early days in terms of validity of outcome data for technical variations in treatment eg. fixation/replacement/use of bone cement. We have a national increase in resouce for hip fractures. We now have some logic to interaction between surgeons and medics/managers. Objectively struggling units get active support. We accept the possible lack of validity of some outcome data. Some units who look bad on paper should not be disadvantaged

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore current use of the Global Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) Minimum Common Dataset (MCD) within established national hip fracture registries, and to propose a revised MCD to enable international benchmarking for hip fracture care.

Aims

National hip fracture registries audit similar aspects of care but there is variation in the actual data collected; these differences restrict international comparison, benchmarking, and research. The Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) published a revised minimum common dataset (MCD) in 2022 to improve consistency and interoperability. Our aim was to assess compatibility of existing registries with the MCD.

Background: Delay in operative fixation of neck of femur fracture is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Apart from medical reasons, inadequate facilities or poor organization has also shown to delay neck of femur fracture patients going to theatre. Methods: In the year 2005, the Orthopaedic Directorate of University Hospitals of Leicester formed a fractured neck of femur project group to look at achieving a mean 48 hour wait (from clinical fitness to surgery) for this group to get to theatre. The salient changes effected by the group included assigning a dedicated fractured neck of femur ward where patients can be fast tracked from A & E. A dedicated half-day theatre hip list 7 days a week was instituted staffed by senior anaesthetist and surgeons. Ortho geriatricians were designated for each day to pre- and post-operatively assess fractured neck of femur patients and optimize their medical condition. The number of Trauma Coordinators and clinical aides were increased to provide 7 days a week cover. Also various services were integrated and specialist discharge coordinator assigned for early discharge. These measures were implemented from June 2006. Results: As a result of these measures the mean time to theatre of fit fractured neck of femur patients increased from 35% in 2005 to 75% in 2007 and 90% for the first 6 months of 2008. The mortality decreased from 18.5% in 2005 to 13.2% in 2007 and 9.3% for first 6 months of 2008. 28.7% of patients were deemed unfit for surgery in 2005. This figure dropped to 6 – 7% in the following years. Also percentage of patients staying longer in hospital decreased from 30.5% in 2005 to 13.4% in 2008. Conclusion: Reorganisation of available resources leads to better service provision and decreased mortality rate in fractured neck of femur patients

The health care system has to deal with substantial health care costs, which are expected to continue to rise due to the increasingly elderly populations. One way of saving has been a reduction of the amount of beds at hospitals. The consequence is that acute patients inappropriately are admitted to non specialized wards because of limited beds. These patients are also known as ‘outliers’. In this study consecutive patients with a hip fracture treated at the orthopaedic department (n=273) are compared with patients treated at other departments (n=147) according to incidence of complications and length of stay (LOS) before and after introduction of an evidence based clinical pathway. There was no medical difference between the populations. However the strict demands of saving costs, with limited beds, have resulted not only in economic consequences with prolonged hospitalization, but also in patient suffering and inconvenience of postoperative complications because of an increasing number of complications. Patients treated at non specialized wards had an extra LOS of stay of 3.7 days in the acute hospital settings and furthermore 13.6 days of LOS including rehabilitation compared to patients treated at the orthopaedic department. In addition we consider the implemented evidence based clinical pathway to be successful since the number of complications was reduced. It is a major challenge to establish effective treatment and rehabilitation for patients after a hip fracture aiming to avoid complications and reduce LOS. Theses fragile patients with a hip fracture ought to be treated at the orthopaedic department, or at departments with geriatric and rehabilitation knowledge. Physiotherapists, occupational therapists and nurses specialising in orthopaedics and geriatricians should take an active part in these patients care, to improve the quality of care and patient safety in patients with a hip fracture

Fracture is the only clinically relevant aspect of osteoporosis—a major public health problem in many countries. The strongest predictor for a new fragility fracture is a previous one. For instance, a patient with one osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture has about a seven-fold increased hip fracture risk; a patient with two compression fractures a 14-fold hip fracture risk. Today, we have evidence based and efficient osteoporosis drugs as well as non-pharmacologic methods for fracture prophylaxis. In risk group patients it often is possible to halve the fracture risk. The orthopaedic surgeon is the first and sometimes the only doctor a fracture patien sees. Therefore, as orthopaedic surgeons, we have a great opportunity—and indeed an onus—to identify patients with increased fracture risk, and to do something about it. Imagine patients with myocardial infarction or stroke discharged from hospital without blood pressure control or having a biochemical profile taken? Such negligence is, alas, not uncommon for patients with fragility fractures. We must think in terms of absolute fracture risk, and implement today’s evidence based knowledge. Secondary prophylaxis should be an integrated part in fracture treatment. And this calls for a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional teamwork including surgeons, geriatricians, endocrinologists and general practitioners, as well as nurses, physiotherapists and a wide range of other paramedical specialists. Such “fracture chains” will reduce the number of unnecessary and preventable injuries and will have a great impact in terms of cost and suffering. This symposium will give an overveiw of fracture-preventing strategies

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).

Aims

Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around the knee are challenging injuries. This study aims to describe the characteristics of knee PPFs and the impact of patient demographics, fracture types, and management modalities on in-hospital mortality.

Purpose of the study: Dementia in the elderly subject aged over 75 years is currently an important public health problem. An important part of the activity in orthopaedic surgery involves this age group. In 2007, 16,812 elderly persons aged over 75 years were hospitalised in our University Hospital (769 in orthopaedic surgery): 1380 patients were considered demented (40 in orthopaedic surgery). The purpose of this work was to evaluate the cognitive function of this population in a teaching hospital unit of orthopaedic and traumatology surgery where the prevalence of dementia appears to be underestimated. Material and methods: Data were collected over a period of four years. This study concerned 113 patient, including 83 women, mean age 81.8 years (range 75–92). The reason for hospitalisation was predominantly fracture of the proximal femur (73%); thirty patients had hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty and 24 other situations. The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) was performed. Results: The MMSE could be interpreted for 100 patients: < 24 for 33, 24 to 26 for 29 and > 27 for 38. Among the 24 patients with no cognitive disorder known before hospitalization (nine patients known to be demented were removed from the analysis) and for whom the MMSE was completed entirely, the most frequent alterations were noted for attention, calculation, and recall-memory items. Discussion: Finally, one-third of the subjects aged over 75 years and hospitalized in our unit presented signs of altered cognitive function according to the MMSE(< 24). This score is one of the criteria for frailness of the elderly subject. This population has an unstable precarious medicosocial status with defective adaptation to stress and change in environment. These persons are exposed to a high risk of morbidity, mortality, dependence, longer hospital stay and institutionalization. The purpose of this screening is to improve management for these patients by proposing more specifically adapted care. Conclusion: It is thus indispensable to screen for cognitive disorders systematically in patients aged over 75 years hospitalized in a surgery unit. The MMSE score can be used for this purpose. This work is in favour of a physician or better a geriatrician within the unit who could be financed directly by his-her own sector of activity

Purpose. Hip fractures are the most common injury requiring hospitalization in both men and women over the age of 65. There is significant mortality associated with hip fracture and delay to surgical treatment increases this rate. We undertook an ethnographic study exploring organizational barriers to timely hip fracture surgery. Method. Using purposive sampling, over 30 interviews were conducted at a large teaching hospital with various professionals involved in the process of getting a patient from ED to surgery and to surgical discharge. This included anaesthetists, surgeons, emergency and internal medicine physicians, nurses, social workers and senior administrative personnel. An additional twelve patient interviews were conducted and reported separately. Following transcription of each tape, a small study team met over the course of several months to read and discuss each transcript in detail. A coding template was developed and each transcript coded with emerging themes noted. Results. Several important themes emerged which impact time to hip fracture surgery. We have classified these as: 1) issues related to inter and intra-professional collaboration; 2) social admissions or “failure to cope” (FTC) patients who are referred to surgical orthopaedic ward beds; 3) difficulties in discharge to rehabilitation; and 4) the disconnect between hospital administration's discourse of efficiency while insufficient resources choke optimal patient flow of care. Conclusion. Inter and intra-professional collaboration has been recognized as central to the provision of excellent, patient-centred care yet not often been studied empirically. Our study revealed obstacles at several stages that stretched from admission at the ED to post-surgical discharge. Tensions were reported between medical, anaesthetic and surgical specialists in relation to consults, anticoagulation and pre-op testing that frustrated attempts to operate within the current Ontario wait time standard of 48 hours. Competition for scarce hospital beds also increased this tension and sense of frustration. In addition, non-operative fracture patients are often referred from ED to orthopaedic surgical wards, thus further delaying access for patients requiring emergent hip fracture surgery due to lack of surgical bed availability. On the basis of these findings our team hopes to advance recommendations designed to address these issues and improve wait times that will be applicable to other hospitals. These recommendations may include the inclusion of a geriatrician or hospitalist on orthopaedic wards as well as harmonized guidelines and care pathways. In addition, we are adding to the understanding of the social organization of acute care in complex and demanding environments