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. Methods. We compared all ten established national hip fracture registries: England, Wales, and Northern Ireland; Scotland; Australia and New Zealand; Republic of Ireland; Germany; the Netherlands; Sweden; Norway; Denmark; and Spain. We tabulated all questions included in each registry, and cross-referenced them against the 32 questions of the MCD dataset. Having identified those questions consistently used in the majority of national audits, and which additional fields were used less commonly, we then used consensus methods to establish a revised MCD. Results. A total of 215 unique questions were used across the ten registries. Only 72 (34%) were used in more than one national audit, and only 32 (15%) by more than half of audits. Only one registry used all 32 questions from the 2014 MCD, and five questions were only collected by a single registry. Only 21 of the 32 questions in the MCD were used in the majority of national audits. Only three fields (anaesthetic grade, operation, and date/time of surgery) were used by all ten established audits. We presented these findings at the Asia-Pacific FFN meeting, and used an online questionnaire to capture feedback from expert clinicians from different countries. A draft revision of the MCD was then presented to all 95 nations represented at the Global FFN conference in September 2021, with online feedback again used to finalize the revised MCD. Conclusion. The revised MCD will help aspirant nations establish new registry programmes, facilitate the integration of novel analytic techniques and greater multinational collaboration, and serve as an internationally-accepted standard for monitoring and improving hip fracture services. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):721–728

Aims. This study estimated trends in incidence of open fractures and the adherence to clinical standards for open fracture care in England. Methods. Longitudinal data collected by the Trauma Audit and Research Network were used to identify 38,347 patients with open fractures, and a subgroup of 12,170 with severe open fractures of the tibia, between 2008 and 2019 in England. Incidence rates per 100,000 person-years and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Clinical care was compared with the British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma and National Major Trauma Centre audit standards. Results. In total, 60% of all open fractures occurred in males; the median age was 48 years (interquartile range (IQR) 29 to 68). Between 2012 and 2019, the overall incidence in England was 6.94 per 100,000 person-years. In males, the highest incidence observed was in those aged 20 to 29 years (11.50 per 100,000 person-years); in females, incidence increased with age, peaking at 32.11/100,000 person-years at 90 years of age and over. Among those with severe open fractures of the tibia, there was a bimodal distribution in males, peaking at 20 to 29 years (3.71/100,000 person-years) and greater than 90 years of age (2.84/100,000 person-years) respectively; among females, incidence increased with age to a peak of 9.91/100,000 person years at 90 years of age and over. There has been variable improvement with time in the clinical care standards for patients with severe open fractures of the tibia. The median time to debridement was 13.0 hours (IQR 6.4 to 20.9); almost two-thirds of patients underwent definitive soft-tissue coverage within 72 hours from 2016 to 2019. Conclusion. This is the first time the incidence of all open fractures has been studied using data from a national audit in England. While most open fractures occurred in young males, the incidence increased with age in females to a much greater level than observed in older males. The degree of missing data in the national audit is startling, and limits the certainty of inferences drawn concerning open fracture care. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):736–746

Aims

Several studies have reported that patients presenting during the evening or weekend have poorer quality healthcare. Our objective was to examine how timely surgery for patients with severe open tibial fracture varies by day and time of presentation and by type of hospital. This cohort study included patients with severe open tibial fractures from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN).

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe services available to patients with periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) in England and Wales, with focus on variation between centres and areas for care improvement.

Aims

Patients with A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures represent a substantial proportion of trauma caseload, and national guidelines recommend that sliding hip screws (SHS) should be used for these injuries. Despite this, intramedullary nails (IMNs) are routinely implanted in many hospitals, at extra cost and with unproven patient outcome benefit. We have used data from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) to examine the use of SHS and IMN for A1 and A2 hip fractures at a national level, and to define the cost implications of management decisions that run counter to national guidelines.

Aims

The aim of this study to compare 30-day survival and recovery of mobility between patients mobilized early (on the day of, or day after surgery for a hip fracture) and patients mobilized late (two days or more after surgery), and to determine whether the presence of dementia influences the association between the timing of mobilization, 30-day survival, and recovery.

Aims

Hip fractures are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and costs. One strategy for improving outcomes is to incentivize hospitals to provide better quality of care. We aimed to determine whether a pay-for-performance initiative affected hip fracture outcomes in England by using Scotland, which did not participate in the scheme, as a control.