The aims of this study were to characterize the frequency of
missing data in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program
(NSQIP) database and to determine how missing data can influence
the results of studies dealing with elderly patients with a fracture
of the hip. Patients who underwent surgery for a fracture of the hip between
2005 and 2013 were identified from the NSQIP database and the percentage
of missing data was noted for demographics, comorbidities and laboratory
values. These variables were tested for association with ‘any adverse
event’ using multivariate regressions based on common ways of handling
missing data.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of the present study was to compare the 30- and 90-day
re-admission rates and complication rates of outpatient and inpatient
total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The United States Medicare Standard Analytical Files database
was questioned to identify patients who had undergone outpatient
or inpatient TSA between 2005 and 2012. Patient characteristics
were compared between the two groups using chi-squared analysis. Multivariate
logistic regression analysis was used to control for differences
in baseline patient characteristics and to compare the two groups
in terms of post-operative complications within 90 days and re-admission
within 30 days and 90 days.Aims
Patients and Methods
While use of large national clinical databases for orthopaedic
trauma research has increased dramatically, there has been little
study of the differences in populations contained therein. In this
study we aimed to compare populations of patients with femoral shaft
fractures across three commonly used national databases, specifically
with regard to age and comorbidities. Patients were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS),
National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and National
Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to compare the operating
time, length of stay (LOS), adverse events and rate of re-admission
for elderly patients with a fracture of the hip treated using either
general or spinal anaesthesia. Patients aged ≥ 70 years who underwent
surgery for a fracture of the hip between 2010 and 2012 were identified
from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality
Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. Of the 9842 patients who
met the inclusion criteria, 7253 (73.7%) were treated with general
anaesthesia and 2589 (26.3%) with spinal anaesthesia. On propensity-adjusted
multivariate analysis, general anaesthesia was associated with slightly increased
operating time (+5 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) +4 to +6,
p <
0.001) and post-operative time in the operating room (+5
minutes, 95% CI +2 to +8, p <
0.001) compared with spinal anaesthesia.
General anaesthesia was associated with a shorter LOS (hazard ratio
(HR) 1.28, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.34, p <
0.001). Any adverse event
(odds ratio (OR) 1.21, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.32, p <
0.001), thromboembolic
events (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.89, p = 0.003), any minor adverse
event (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.32, p <
0.001), and blood transfusion
(OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.49, p <
0.001) were associated with
general anaesthesia. General anaesthesia was associated with decreased
rates of urinary tract infection (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.87,
p <
0.001). There was no clear overall advantage of one type
of anaesthesia over the other, and surgeons should be aware of the
specific risks and benefits associated with each type. Cite this article:
