Abstract. Introduction. Inter-prosthetic femoral fractures (IPFF) are fractures occurring between ipsilateral hip and knee implants or fixation devices. In 2020, the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was extended to capture data from patients with peri-prosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF), including those specifically with IPFF. This study aims to describe the epidemiology and treatment of IPFF in England and Wales. Methodology. This population-based observational cohort study utilised open-access data available from the NHFD. Patients aged over 60, admitted to an acute hospital in England or Wales with an IPFF, within the period 1st January 2020 to 31st December 2020 were included. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of IPFF in England and Wales. The secondary outcome was the treatment received. Results. Of 2606 patients admitted with PPFF, a total of 133 fractures occurred between ipsilateral hip and knee implants. Internal fixation was performed most frequently, in 87 cases. Revision arthroplasty was performed in 15 cases (hip n=10, knee n=5). A total of 20 patients were managed non-operatively, and three underwent primary arthroplasty (hip n=2, knee n=1). Conclusion. As the proportion of patients living with hip and knee implants continues to increase, it is expected that so too will the incidence of IPFF. This study is the first to estimate the incidence of IPFF in England and Wales. This is likely an underestimate of the true incidence and so we support calls for the prioritisation of further research into the epidemiology, prevention, and management of IPFF

Background. Since it's establishment in 2007, the National Hip Fracture Database [NHFD] has been the key driving force in improving care for hip fracture patients across the UK. It has facilitated the setting of standards to which all musculoskeletal units are held, and guides service development to optimise outcomes in this group of patients. As with any audit, the ability to draw conclusions and make recommendations for changes in practise relies on the accuracy of data collection. This project aimed to scrutinise the data submitted to the NHFD from a Major Trauma Centre [MTC], focusing on procedure coding, and discuss the implications of any inaccuracies. Method. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of all procedure coding data entered into the NHFD from July 2009 to July 2014 at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. We examined 1978 cases for discrepancies, comparing procedure codes entered into the NHFD with post-procedure imaging and operative notes. Results. The procedure coding data submitted to the NHFD was highly inaccurate, with incorrect procedure codes in 24% of the 1978 cases reviewed. In particular, coding of cemented total arthroplasty and cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty, with coding errors in registry data of 42% and 39% respectively. Of the 67 THRs performed only 52% were correctly coded for, and only 626 of the 915 hemiarthroplasties (68%). 16% of cannulated hip screws actually underwent primary arthroplasty. Conclusions. This study highlights the inaccuracy of coding data entered into the NHFD from a Major Trauma Centre, with data on arthroplasty being particularly inadequate. The unreliability of procedure data leaves us unable to evaluate surgical treatment strategies using the NHFD. This has worrying implications for standard setting, service development and, consequently, patient care. Level of evidence. 2c

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

Abstract. Introduction. In 2020, the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was extended to capture data from patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF) with plans to include these patients in Best Practice Tarif. We aimed to describe the epidemiology of PPFF in England and Wales, with a particular focus on fractures occurring around the femoral component of knee prostheses. Methodology. This population-based observational cohort study utilised open-access data available from the NHFD. Patients aged over 60, admitted to an acute hospital in England or Wales with a PPFF, within the period 1st January 2020 to 31st December 2020 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPFF in England and Wales. The secondary outcome was the treatment received. Results. We identified 2606 patients with PPFF from 135 hospitals. Of these, a total of 578 fractures occurred around the femoral component of a knee implant. These were classified as Vancouver A (epicondylar, n=77), B (involving implant/cement, n=166) and C (proximal to implant/cement, n=335). Internal fixation was the most employed treatment, used in 352 cases. Revision arthroplasty was performed in 80 cases, and 100 were managed non-operatively. Only 28% of operated PPFF went to theatre within 36 hours but nearly 90% had orthogeriatrician review within 72 hours. Conclusion. Eighty six percent of patients with PPFF were treated with non-revision surgery and would not be recorded in the National Joint Registry. In response, we support calls for the prioritisation of further research into the prevention and management of PPFF around the knee

The National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) is a clinically led web based audit used to inform national policy guidelines. The aim of this audit was to establish the accuracy of completion of NHFD v13.0 theatre collection sheets, identify common pitfalls and areas of good practice, whilst raising awareness of the importance of accuracy of this data and the manner in which it reflects performance of CAH Trauma & Orthopaedic unit in relation to national guidelines. Our aim was to improve completion up to >80% by the operating surgeon and improve overall accuracy. The methodology within both cycles of the audit were identical. It involved reviewing the NHFD V13.0 completed by the operating surgeon and cross-checking their accuracy against clinical notes, operation notes, imaging, anaesthetic charts and A&E admission assessment. Following completion of cycle 1 these results were presented, and education surrounding V13.0 was provided, at the monthly trust audit meeting. At this point we introduced a sticker onto the pre-operative checklist for Hip fractures. This included time of admission and reason for delay. We then completed a re-audit. Cycle-1 included 25 operations, 56% (n=14) had a completed V13.0 form. Of these 21% (n=3) were deemed to be 100% accurate. Cycle-2 included 31 operations (between April – June 21) 81% (n=25) had a completed intra-operative from and showed an increase in accuracy to 56% (n=14). Through raising awareness, education and our interventions we have seen a significant improvement in the completion and accuracy of v13.0. Although 100% accuracy was not achieved its clear that education and intervention will improve compliance over time. Through the interventions that we have implemented we have shown that it is possible to improve completion and accuracy of the NHFD V13.0 theatre collection sheet locally and feel this could be implemented nationally

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

Hip fracture is a common injury with a high associated mortality. Many recommendations regarding timing of operative intervention exist for patients with such injuries. The Best Practice Tariff was introduced in England and Wales in 2010, offering financial incentives for surgery undertaken within 36 hours of admission. The England and Wales National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidance states that surgery should be performed on the day or day after admission. Due to lack of clear evidence, this recommendation is based on Humanitarian grounds. NICE have called for further research into the effect of surgical timing on mortality. We utilised data from the National Hip Fracture database prospectively collected between 2007 and 2015, comprising 413,063 hip fractures. Using 11 variables, both Cox and Logistic regression analysis was used to establish the effect on mortality of each 12 hour interval from admission to surgery. For each 12 hour time frame from admission to surgery a trend for improved 30 day survival was demonstrated the earlier the surgery was performed. However, this did not reach significance until beyond 48 hours (Hazard ratio of 1.12, 95% CI: 1.04–1.20). Surgery after 48 hours suffered significantly higher chance of mortality compared to surgery done within 12 hours. This is the largest analysis undertaken to date. Lowest mortality rates are found within the 0–12 hour window. After 48 hours there is a significant increased risk of mortality compared to the 0–12 hour time frame. As such, expeditious surgery within 48 hours can be justified both on humanitarian and survivorship grounds. Hip fracture surgery performed within 48 hours is associated with reduced mortality when compared to that beyond this time. This is in agreement with Blue Book recommendations and extends the currently recommended NICE and Best Practice Tariff targets of 36 hours

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. 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. Methods. We used the NHFD to identify all operations for fixation of trochanteric fractures in England and Wales between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021. A uniform price band from each of three hip fracture implant manufacturers was used to set cost implications alongside variation in implant use. Results. We identified 18,156 A1 and A2 trochanteric hip fractures in 162 centres. Of these, 13,483 (74.3%) underwent SHS fixation, 2,352 (13.0%) were managed with short IMN, and 2,321 (12.8%) were managed with long IMN. Total cost of IMN added up to £1.89 million in 2021, and the clinical justification for this is unclear since rates of IMN use varied from 0% to 97% in different centres. Conclusion. Most trochanteric hip fractures are managed with SHS, in keeping with national guidelines. There is considerable variance between hospitals for implant choice, despite the lack of evidence for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of more expensive nailing systems. This suggests either a lack of awareness of national guidelines or a choice not to follow them. We encourage provider units to reassess their practice if outwith the national norm. Funding bodies should examine implant use closely in this population to prevent resource waste at a time of considerable health austerity. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):741–745

The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) was developed in 2007 as a predictor of 30-day mortality after hip fracture surgery following a neck of femur fracture. The National Hip Fracture Database is the standard used which calculated their own score using national data. The NHF score for 30-day mortality was calculated for 50 patients presenting with a fractured neck femur injury between January 2020 to March 2020. A score <5 was classified as low risk and >/=5 as high risk. Aim was to assess the accuracy in calculating the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score against the National Hip Fracture Database. To explore whether it should it be routinely included during initial assessment to aid clinical management?. There was an increase in the number of mortalities observed in patients who belonged to the high-risk group (>=5) compared to the low risk group. COVID-19 positive patients had worse outcomes with average 30-day mortality of 6.78 compared to the average of 6.06. GEH NHF score per month showed significant accuracy against the NHFD scores. The identification of high-risk groups from their NHF score can allow for targeted optimisations and elucidation of risk factors easily gathered at the point of hospitalisation. The NHFS is a valuable tool and useful predictor to stratify the risk of 30-day mortality and 1-year mortality after hip fracture surgery. Inclusion of the score should be considered as mandatory Trust policy for neck of femur fracture patients to aid clinical management and improve patient safety overall

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. Methods. This work used data freely available from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) facilities survey in 2021, which asked 21 questions about the care of patients with PPFFs, and nine relating to clinical decision-making around a hypothetical case. Results. Of 174 centres contributing data to the NHFD, 161 provided full responses and 139 submitted data on PPFF. Lack of resources was cited as the main reason for not submitting data. Surgeon (44.6%) and theatre (29.7%) availability were reported as the primary reasons for surgical delay beyond 36 hours. Less than half had a formal process for a specialist surgeon to operate on PPFF at least every other day. The median number of specialist surgeons at each centre was four (interquartile range (IQR) 3 to 6) for PPFF around both hips and knees. Around one-third of centres reported having one dedicated theatre list per week. The routine discussion of patients with PPFF at local and regional multidisciplinary team meetings was lower than that for all-cause revision arthroplasties. Six centres reported transferring all patients with PPFF around a hip joint to another centre for surgery, and this was an occasional practice for a further 34. The management of the hypothetical clinical scenario was varied, with 75 centres proposing ORIF, 35 suggested revision surgery and 48 proposed a combination of both revision and fixation. Conclusion. There is considerable variation in both the organization of PPFF services England and Wales, and in the approach taken to an individual case. The rising incidence of PPFF and complexity of these patients highlight the need for pathway development. The adoption of networks may reduce variability and improve outcomes for patients with PPFF. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(5):378–384

Within an ageing population, the morbidity and mortality burden of neck of femur fractures will only worsen. Financially incentivising acute Trusts via the Best Practice Tariff for inpatient care has yielded good results(1,2,3,4) but post-discharge care is still variable. Most importantly, restoring patients to their pre-fracture mobility is key to their quality of life(5,6) and reducing both readmissions to hospital(7,8) and expensive local authority residential care. Unfortunately, physiotherapist vacancies are in their thousands(9,10) leading to waiting times of around three months once discharged(11). In 2019, the Royal Derby Hospital created a novel Hip Fracture Patient Advocate (HFPA) to observe those who have fallen through gaps in community services. It involves monitoring patients’ progression, signposting to appropriate services, flagging issues to the responsible consultant and assisting in physical mobilisation. A retrospective review examined data from patients discharged to their own homes. This included demographics, residential status and mobility, both pre-fracture and at 120 days post-fracture. Mobility was classified into five categories, in line with the national hip fracture database. In 2018, of 238 patients, 41.2% returned to their baseline or increased mobility, and, after the introduction of the HFPA in 2019, this figure increased to 48.2%. In one year, there was a 7% increase in patients recovering their baseline mobility. This is a cost-effective intervention that can successfully improve mobility, leading to improved long-term outcomes. This includes the potential to reduce acute readmissions and the need for residential care, appealing to Integrated Care Boards. It also bridges the gap to primary care to optimise medical management and after further development, could be financially-incentivised via the Best Practice Tariff. Rather than thinking more expensive clinicians are required, this study proposes that a HFPA can garner better outcomes for both the patient and the wider system

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

Abstract. Objectives. The need to accurately forecast the injury burden has never been higher. With an aging, ever expanding trauma population and less than half of the beds available compared to 1990, the National Health Service (NHS) is stretched to breaking point1,2. Resultantly, we aimed to determine whether it is possible to predict the proportionality of injuries treated operatively within orthopaedic departments based on their number of Neck of Femur fracture (NOF) patients reported both in our study and the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD). Methods. We utilised the ORthopaedic trauma hospital outcomes - Patient operative delays (ORTHOPOD) dataset of 22,585 trauma patients across the four countries of the United Kingdom (UK) admitted to 83 hospitals between 22/08/22 – 16/10/22. This dataset had two arms: arm one was assessing the caseload and theatre capacity, arm two assessed the patient, injury and management demographics. Results. Our results complied with the data reported to the NHFD in over 80% of cases for both the 2022 and five-year average reported numbers. More operations were performed for elderly hip fractures alone than for the combined totals of the next four most common fractures: ankle, distal radius, tibial shaft and forearm (6387 vs 5922). Conversely, 10 out of the 13 fracture types were not encountered by at least one hospital and 93% of hospitals encountered less than 2 fractures of a certain type.60% of trauma is treated within Trauma Units (TUs) however, per unit, Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) treat approximately 43% more patients. Similarly, 11 out of the 14 fracture types examined presented more frequently to a MTC however 3 of the most common fractures had a preponderance for TUs (elderly hip, distal radius and forearm fractures). After excluding NOF, lower limb fractures accounted for approximately 57% of fractures in all countries and ankle and distal radius fracture combined comprised more than 50% in 74% of regions. There were few outliers across the study regarding number of fractures treated by a hospital with tibial shaft fractures demonstrating the highest number of outliers with 4. Conclusions. The number of hip fractures seen on average by an individual unit remains relatively consistent as does the regional variation of any given fracture; resultantly, it is possible to predict injury proportionality based off a unit's hip fracture numbers. This powerful tool could transform both resource allocation and recruitment. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

In 2007, the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was conceived in the United Kingdom (UK) as a national audit aiming to improve hip fracture care across the country. It now represents the world's largest hip fracture registry. The purpose of the NHFD is to evaluate aspects of best practice for hip fracture care, at an institutional level, that reflect the evidence-based clinical guidelines and quality standards developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. No national program currently exists, equivalent to the NHFD, in Canada despite evidence suggesting that national audit programs can significantly improve patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate aspects of best practice for hip fractures at our Canadian academic tertiary referral center using the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) and benchmarks used by the NHFD. In doing so, we aimed to compare our performance to other hospitals contributing to the NHFD database. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on consecutive patients who presented to our Canadian center for surgical management of a hip fracture between August 2019 to September 2020. Fracture types included intertrochanteric, subtrochanteric, and femoral neck fractures treated with either surgical fixation or arthroplasty. Cases were identified from the affiliate institute's Operatively Repaired Fractures Database (ORFD). The ORFD prospectively collects patient-level data extracted from electronic medical records, operating room information systems, and from patients’ discharge summaries. All applicable data from our database were compared to the established KPI and benchmarks published by the NHFD that apply to the Canadian healthcare system. Six hundred and seven patients’ data (64.5% female) were extracted from the ORFD, mean age 80.4 ± 13.3 years. The NHFD contains data from 63,284 patients across the entire UK. The affiliate institute performed inferiorly compared to the NHFD for two KPIs: prompt surgery (surgery by the day following presentation with hip fracture, 52.8% vs. 69%) and prompt mobilization after surgery (mobilized out of bed by the day after operation, 43.0% vs. 81.0%). However, more patients at the affiliate institute were not delirious when tested postoperatively (89.6% vs. 68.4%). There was no significant difference in the average length of stay (12.23 days versus 13.5 days) or in 30-day mortality rate (8.4% versus 8.3%). More than half of all KPI's and benchmarks for patients receiving a hip fracture surgery at our tertiary referral center in Canada ranked significantly lower than patients receiving a hip fracture surgery in the UK. These findings indicate that perhaps a national audit program should be implemented in Canada to improve aspects of hip fracture care, at an institutional level. Following evidence-based clinical guidelines and using standardized benchmarks would encourage change and foster improvement across Canadian centres when necessary

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. Methods. Analysis of the National Hip Fracture Database and hospital records for 126,897 patients aged ≥ 60 years who underwent surgery for a hip fracture in England and Wales between 2014 and 2016. Using logistic regression, we adjusted for covariates with a propensity score to estimate the association between the timing of mobilization, survival, and recovery of walking ability. Results. A total of 99,667 patients (79%) mobilized early. Among those mobilized early compared to those mobilized late, the weighted odds ratio of survival was 1.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80 to 2.05), of recovering outdoor ambulation was 1.25 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.51), and of recovering indoor ambulation was 1.53 (95% CI 1.32 to 1.78) by 30 days. The weighted probabilities of survival at 30 days post-admission were 95.9% (95% CI 95.7% to 96.0%) for those who mobilized early and 92.4% (95% CI 92.0% to 92.8%) for those who mobilized late. The weighted probabilities of regaining the ability to walk outdoors were 9.7% (95% CI 9.2% to 10.2%) and indoors 81.2% (95% CI 80.0% to 82.4%), for those who mobilized early, and 7.9% (95% CI 6.6% to 9.2%) and 73.8% (95% CI 71.3% to 76.2%), respectively, for those who mobilized late. Patients with dementia were less likely to mobilize early despite observed associations with survival and ambulation recovery for those with and without dementia. Conclusion. Early mobilization is associated with survival and recovery for patients (with and without dementia) after hip fracture. Early mobilization should be incorporated as a measured indicator of quality. Reasons for failure to mobilize early should also be recorded to inform quality improvement initiatives. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1317–1324

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

Hip fracture principally affects the frailest in society, many of whom are care dependent, and are disproportionately at risk of contracting COVID-19. We examined the impact of COVID-19 infection on hip fracture mortality in England. We conducted a cohort study of patients with hip fracture recorded in the National Hip Fracture Database between 1st February 2019 and 31st October 2020, in England. Data were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics to quantify patient characteristics and comorbidities, Office for National Statistics mortality data, and Public Health England's SARS-CoV-2 testing results. Multivariable Cox regression examined determinants of 90-day mortality. Excess mortality attributable to COVID-19 was quantified using Quasi-Poisson models. Analysis of 102,900 hip fractures (42,630 occurring during the pandemic) revealed that amongst those with COVID-19 infection at presentation (n=1,120) there was a doubling of 90-day mortality; hazard ratio (HR) 2.05 (95%CI 1.86–2.26), while for infections arising between 8–30 days after presentation (n=1,644) the figure was even higher at 2.52 (2.32–2.73). Malnutrition [1.44 (1.19–1.75)] and non-operative treatment [2.89 (2.16–3.86)] were the only modifiable risk factors for death in COVID-19 positive patients. Patients with previous COVID-19 initially had better survival compared to those who contracted COVID-19 around the time of their hip fracture; however, survival rapidly declined and by 365 days the combination of hip fracture and COVID-19 infection was associated with a 50% mortality rate. Between 1st January and 30th June 2020, 1,273 (99.7%CI 1,077–1,465) excess deaths occurred within 90 days of hip fracture, representing an excess mortality of 23% (20%–26%), with most deaths occurring within 30 days. COVID-19 infection more than doubled early hip fracture mortality; the first 30-days after injury were most critical, suggesting that targeted interventions in this period may have most benefit in improving survival

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

A hip fracture represents the extreme end of osteoporosis, placing a significant burden on secondary care, society, and the individual patient. The National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) reports each hospital's attainment of the BPT with other measures, along with reporting outcomes. There is clearly wide variability in provision of orthogerriatrician (OG) services across the dataset. Unfortunately, despite overwhelming evidence that provision of an OG service is of benefit, it is presently challenging to recruit to this important specialty within the UK. Publicly available reports from the NHFD were obtained for each of the 177 participating hospitals for 2017. This was matched with information held within the annual NHFD Facilities Audit for the same period, which include hours of OG support for each hospital. This information was combined with a Freedom of Information request made by email to each hospital for further details concerning OG support. The outcome measures used were Length of Stay (LoS), mortality, and return to usual residence. Comparison was made with provision of OG services by use of Pearson's correlation coefficient. In addition, differences in services were compared between the 25% (44) hospitals delivering outcomes at the extremes for each measure. Attainment of BPT correlated fairly with LoS (−0.48) and to less of a degree with mortality (−0.1) and return home (0.05). Perioperative medical assessment contributed very strongly with BPT attainment (0.75). In turn perioperative medical assessment correlated fairly with LoS (−0.40) and mortality (−0.23) but not return home (0.02). Provision of perioperative medical assessment attainment was correlated fairly with total OG minutes available per new patient (0.22), total OG minutes available per patient per day (0.29) and number of days per week of OG cover (0.34); with no link for number of patients per orthogeriatrician (0.01). Mortality for the best units were associated with 30% more consultant OG time available per patient per day, and 51% more OG time available per patient. Units returning the most patients to their usual residence had little association with OG time, although had 59% fewer patients per OG, the best units had a 19% longer LoS. For all three measures results for the best had on average 0.5 days per week better routine OG access. There is no doubt that good quality care gives better results for this challenging group of patients. However, the interaction of BPT, other care metrics, level of OG support and patient factors with outcomes is complex. We have found OG time available per patient per day appears to influence particularly LoS and mortality. Options to increase OG time per patient include reducing patient numbers (ensuring community osteoporosis/falls prevention in place, including reducing in-patient falls); increasing OG time across the week (employing greater numbers/spreading availability over 7 days per week); and reducing LoS. A reduction in LoS has the largest effect of increasing OG time, and although it is dependent on OG support, it is only fairly correlated with this and many other factors play a part, which could be addressed in units under pressure