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.
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. To assess whether volume of hip fracture cases attended to by individual hospitals is associated with the quality of care provided and clinical outcomes.Background
Aim
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.
Serum lactate has been shown to be an indicator of adverse clinical outcomes in patients admitted secondary to general trauma or sepsis. We retrospectively investigated whether admission serum venous lactate can predict in-hospital mortality in patients with hip fractures. Over a 38-month period the admission venous lactate of 807 patients with hip fractures was collated. Mean age was 82 years. The overall in-hospital mortality for this cohort was 9.4%. Mortality was not influenced by the fracture pattern or the type of surgery - be it internal fixation or arthroplasty (p = 0.7). A critical threshold of 3 mmol/L with respect to the influence of venous lactate level on mortality was identified. Mortality rate in those with a lactate level of less than 3 mmol/L was 8.6% and 14.2% for those whose level was 3 mmol/L or greater. A 1 mmol/L increase in venous lactate was associated with a 1.2 (1.02–1.41) increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Patients with a venous lactate of 3 mmol/L or higher had twice the odds of death in hospital compared to matched individuals. There was no statistically significant difference in ASA distribution between those with a lactate of less than or greater than 3 mmol/L.Background and Purpose
Method and Results
Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a physical process. There is compression of the cauda equina resulting in arrest of the electrochemical signal from the central nervous system. Previous studies have demonstrated that anthropomorphic features influence nerve conduction properties. We therefore sought to if there was an association between biophysical parameters and CES.Background
Aim
Large studies have reported high dislocation rates (7 to 24%) following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), particularly when the revision is undertaken in the presence of pre-existing instability. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiographic outcome of 155 consecutive revision THA's that had been performed using an unconstrained dual-mobility acetabular implant. It features a mobile polyethylene liner articulating with both the prosthesis head and a metal acetabular cup, such that the liner acts as the femoral head in extreme positions. It can be implanted in either a press fit or cemented manner. Mean follow-up was 40 months (18–66) and average age 77 (42–89). Uncemented (n=122) and cemented (n=33) implants with a reinforcing cage, were used. Indications were aseptic loosening (n=113), recurrent instability (n=29), periprosthetic fracture (n=11) and sepsis (n=2). Three of the 155 cases (1.9%) dislocated within 6 weeks of surgery and were successfully managed with closed reduction. The 3 dislocations occurred in the groups revised for recurrent dislocation and periprosthetic fracture. There were no cases of recurrent dislocation and no revisions for implant failure. Despite a pantheon of options available, post-operative dislocation remains a challenge especially in patients with risk factors for instability. The use of large diameter heads is proven to improve stability but there are concerns regarding wear rates, metal toxicity and recurrent dislocation in the presence of abductor dysfunction. With constrained liners there are concerns regarding device failure and aseptic loosening due to implant overload. Our dislocation rates of 1.9% and survivorship to date compare favourably with alternative techniques and are also in line with studies from France using implants of a similar design. In our hands, where there are risk factors for dislocation, the use of a dual-mobility implant has been very effective at both restoring and maintaining stability in patients undergoing revision THA.
