We reviewed all patients who sustained a fracture of the hip
and were treated in Northern Ireland over a period of 15 years to
identify trends in incidence, the demographics of the patients,
the rates of mortality, the configuration of the fracture and the
choice of implant. Since 01 January 2001 data about every fracture of the hip sustained
in an adult have been collected centrally in Northern Ireland. All
adults with such a fracture between 2000 and 2015 were included
in the study. Temporal changes in their demographics, the mode of
treatment, and outcomes including mortality were analysed.Aims
Patients and Methods
Hip hemiarthroplasty is a standard treatment for intracapsular
proximal femoral fractures in the frail elderly. In this study we
have explored the implications of early return to theatre, within
30 days, on patient outcome following hip hemiarthroplasty. We retrospectively reviewed the hospital records of all hip hemiarthroplasties
performed in our unit between January 2010 and January 2015. Demographic
details, medical backround, details of the primary procedure, complications,
subsequent procedures requiring return to theatre, re-admissions,
discharge destination and death were collected.Aims
Patients and Methods
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. 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. Aims
Patients and Methods
The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) was
developed to assess the risk of death following a fracture of the
hip, based on pre-operative patient characteristics. We performed
an independent validation of the NHFS, assessed the degree of geographical
variation that exists between different units within the United
Kingdom and attempted to define a NHFS level that is associated
with high risk of mortality. The NHFS was calculated retrospectively for consecutive patients
presenting with a fracture of the hip to two hospitals in England.
The observed 30-day mortality for each NHFS cohort was compared
with that predicted by the NHFS using the Hosmer–Lemeshow test.
The distribution of NHFS in the observed group was compared with
data from other hospitals in the United Kingdom. The proportion
of patients identified as high risk and the mortality within the
high risk group were assessed for groups defined using different
thresholds for the NHFS. In all 1079 hip fractures were included in the analysis, with
a mean age of 83 years (60 to 105), 284 (26%) male. Overall 30-day
mortality was 7.3%. The NHFS was a significant predictor of 30-day
mortality. Statistically significant differences in the distribution
of the NHFS were present between different units in England (p <
0.001). A NHFS ≥ 6 appears to be an appropriate cut-point to identify
patients at high risk of mortality following a fracture of the hip. Cite this article:
The annual incidence of hip fracture is 620 000 in the European Union. The cost of this clinical problem has been estimated at 1.75 million disability-adjusted life years lost, equating to 1.4% of the total healthcare burden in established market economies. Recent guidance from The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) states that research into the clinical and cost effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip fracture is a priority. We asked the question: can a trial investigating THA for hip fracture currently be delivered in the NHS? We performed a contemporaneous process evaluation that provides a context for the interpretation of the findings of WHiTE Two – a randomised study of THA for hip fracture. We developed a mixed methods approach to situate the trial centre within the context of wider United Kingdom clinical practice. We focused on fidelity, implementation, acceptability and feasibility of both the trial processes and interventions to stakeholder groups, such as healthcare providers and patients.Objectives
Methods
The lack of a consensus for core health outcomes
that should be reported in clinical research has hampered study design
and evidence synthesis. We report a United Kingdom consensus for
a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of patients with a
hip fracture. We adopted a modified nominal group technique to derive consensus
on 1) which outcome domains should be measured, and 2) methods of
assessment. Participants reflected a diversity of perspectives and
experience. They received an evidence synthesis and postal questionnaire
in advance of the consensus meeting, and ranked the importance of
candidate domains and the relevance and suitability of short-listed
measures. During the meeting, pre-meeting source data and questionnaire
responses were summarised, followed by facilitated discussion and
a final plenary session. A COS was determined using a closed voting
system: a 70% consensus was required. Consensus supported a five-domain COS: mortality, pain, activities
of daily living, mobility, and health-related quality of life (HRQL).
Single-item measures of mortality and mobility (indoor/outdoor walking
status) and a generic multi-item measure of HRQL - the EuroQoL EQ-5D
- were recommended. These measures should be included as a minimum
in all hip fracture trials. Other outcome measures should be added
depending on the particular interventions being studied. Cite this article:
The aims of this study were to identify the early
in-hospital mortality rate after hip fracture, identify factors associated
with this mortality, and identify the cause of death in these patients.
A retrospective cohort study was performed on 4426 patients admitted
to our institution between the 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2013
with a hip fracture (1128 male (26%), mean age 82.0 years (60 to
105)). Admissions increased annually, but despite this 30-day mortality
decreased from 12.1% to 6.5%; 77% of these were in-hospital deaths.
Male gender (odds ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3
to 3.0), increasing age (age ≥ 91; OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 12.2) and
comorbidity (American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3 to 5;
OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.0 to 8.7) were independently and significantly
associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality. From 220
post-mortem reports, the most common causes of death were respiratory
infections (35%), ischaemic heart disease (21%), and cardiac failure
(13%). A sub-group of hip fracture patients at highest risk of early
death can be identified with these risk factors, and the knowledge
of the causes of death can be used to inform service improvements
and the development of a more didactic care pathway, so that multidisciplinary
intervention can be focused for this sub-group in order to improve
their outcome. Cite this article:
Hip fracture is a global public health problem.
The National Hip Fracture Database provides a framework for service evaluation
in this group of patients in the United Kingdom, but does not collect
patient-reported outcome data and is unable to provide meaningful
data about the recovery of quality of life. We report one-year patient-reported outcomes of a prospective
cohort of patients treated at a single major trauma centre in the
United Kingdom who sustained a hip fracture between January 2012
and March 2014. There was an initial marked decline in quality of life from baseline
measured using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D). It was followed
by a significant improvement to 120 days for all patients. Although
their quality of life improved during the year after the fracture,
it was still significantly lower than before injury irrespective
of age group or cognitive impairment (mean reduction EQ-5D 0.22;
95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.26). There was strong evidence
that quality of life was lower for patients with cognitive impairment.
There was a mean reduction in EQ-5D of 0.28 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.35)
in patients <
80 years of age. This difference was consistent
(and fixed) throughout follow-up. Quality of life does not improve
significantly during recovery from hip fracture in patients over
80 years of age (p = 0.928). Secondary measures of function showed
similar trends. Hip fracture marks a step down in the quality of life of a patient:
it accounts for approximately 0.22 disability adjusted life years
in the first year after fracture. This is equivalent to serious
neurological conditions for which extensive funding for research
and treatment is made available. Cite this article:
Concerns have been reported to the United Kingdom
National Patient Safety Agency, warning that cementing the femoral component
during hip replacement surgery for fracture of the proximal femur
may increase peri-operative mortality. The National Hip Fracture Database collects demographic and outcome
data about patients with a fracture of the proximal femur from over
100 participating hospitals in the United Kingdom. We conducted
a mixed effects logistic regression analysis of this dataset to
determine whether peri-operative mortality was increased in patients
who had undergone either hemiarthroplasty or total hip replacement
using a cemented femoral component. A total of 16 496 patients from
129 hospitals were included in the analysis, which showed a small
but significant adjusted survival benefit associated with cementing
(odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.96). Other statistically
significant variables in predicting death at discharge, listed in
order of magnitude of effect, were gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists
grade, age, walking accompanied outdoors and arthroplasty. Interaction
terms between cementing and these other variables were sequentially
added to, but did not improve, the model. This study has not shown an increase in peri-operative mortality
as a result of cementing the femoral component in patients requiring
hip replacement following fracture of the proximal femur.
Not all questions can be answered by prospective randomised controlled trials. Registries were introduced as a way of collecting information on joint replacements at a population level. They have helped to identify failing implants and the data have also been used to monitor the performance of individual surgeons. This review aims to look at some of the less well known registries that are currently being used worldwide, including those kept on knee ligaments, ankle arthroplasty, fractures and trauma.
Hip fracture is a common injury associated with
high mortality, long-term disability and huge socio-economic burden.
Yet there has been relatively little research into best treatment,
and evidence that has been generated has often been criticised for
its poor quality. Here, we discuss the advances made towards overcoming
these criticisms and the future directions for hip fracture research:
how co-ordinating existing national infrastructures and use of now
established clinical research networks will likely go some way towards
overcoming the practical and financial challenges of conducting
large trials. We highlight the importance of large collaborative
pragmatic trials to inform decision/policy makers and the progress
made towards reaching a consensus on a core outcome set to facilitate data
pooling for evidence synthesis and meta-analysis. These advances and future directions are a priority in order
to establish the high-quality evidence base required for this important
group of patients. Cite this article:
With the established success of the National
Joint Registry and the emergence of a range of new national initiatives for
the capture of electronic data in the National Health Service, orthopaedic
surgery in the United Kingdom has found itself thrust to the forefront
of an information revolution. In this review we consider the benefits
and threats that this revolution poses, and how orthopaedic surgeons
should marshal their resources to ensure that this is a force for
good.
Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the
greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a
heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. Controversy exists regarding
the optimal treatment for independent patients with displaced intracapsular fractures
of the proximal femur. The recognised alternatives are hemiarthroplasty
and total hip replacement. At present there is no established standard
of care, with both types of arthroplasty being used in many centres.
The principal advantages of total hip replacement are a functional
benefit over hemiarthroplasty and a reduced risk of revision surgery.
The principal criticism is the increased risk of dislocation. We
believe that an alternative acetabular component may reduce the
risk of dislocation but still provide the functional benefit of
total hip replacement in these patients. We therefore propose to
investigate the dislocation risk of a dual-mobility acetabular component
compared with standard polyethylene component in total hip replacement
for independent patients with displaced intracapsular fractures
of the proximal femur within the framework of the larger WHiTE (Warwick
Hip Trauma Evaluation) Comprehensive Cohort Study. Cite this article:
The National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence (NICE) guidelines from 2011 recommend the use of cemented
hemi-arthroplasty for appropriate patients with an intracapsular
hip fracture. In our institution all patients who were admitted
with an intracapsular hip fracture and were suitable for a hemi-arthroplasty
between April 2010 and July 2012 received an uncemented prosthesis
according to our established departmental routine practice. A retrospective
analysis of outcome was performed to establish whether the continued
use of an uncemented stem was justified. Patient, surgical and outcome
data were collected on the National Hip Fracture database. A total
of 306 patients received a Cathcart modular head on a Corail uncemented
stem as a hemi-arthroplasty. The mean age of the patients was 83.3
years ( Cite this article:
The optimal management of intracapsular fractures of the femoral
neck in independently mobile patients remains open to debate. Successful
fixation obviates the limitations of arthroplasty for this group
of patients. However, with fixation failure rates as high as 30%,
the outcome of revision surgery to salvage total hip arthroplasty
(THA) must be considered. We carried out a systematic review to
compare the outcomes of salvage THA and primary THA for intracapsular
fractures of the femoral neck. We performed a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews
and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) compliant systematic review, using the
PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane libraries databases. A meta-analysis
was performed where possible, and a narrative synthesis when a meta-analysis
was not possible.Aims
Patients and Methods
National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidelines
state that cemented stems with an Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel
(ODEP) rating of >
3B should be used for hemiarthroplasty when treating
an intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck. These recommendations
are based on studies in which most, if not all stems, did not hold
such a rating. This case-control study compared the outcome of hemiarthroplasty
using a cemented (Exeter) or uncemented (Corail) femoral stem. These
are the two prostheses most commonly used in hip arthroplasty in
the UK. Data were obtained from two centres; most patients had undergone
hemiarthroplasty using a cemented Exeter stem (n = 292/412). Patients
were matched for all factors that have been shown to influence mortality
after an intracapsular fracture of the neck of the femur. Outcome
measures included: complications, re-operations and mortality rates
at two, seven, 30 and 365 days post-operatively. Comparable outcomes
for the two stems were seen. There were more intra-operative complications in the uncemented
group (13% This study therefore supports the use of both cemented and uncemented
stems of proven design, with an ODEP rating of 10A, in patients
with an intracapsular fracture of the neck of the femur. Cite this article:
There has been extensive discussion about the
effect of delay to surgery on mortality in patients sustaining a fracture
of the hip. Despite the low level of evidence provided by many studies,
a consensus has been accepted that delay of >
48 hours is detrimental
to survival. The aim of this prospective observational study was
to determine if early surgery confers a survival benefit at 30 days. Between 1989 and 2013, data were prospectively collected on patients
sustaining a fracture of the hip at Peterborough City Hospital.
They were divided into groups according to the time interval between
admission and surgery. These thresholds ranged from <
6 hours
to between 49 and 72 hours. The outcome which was assessed was the
30-day mortality. Adjustment for confounders was performed using
multivariate binary logistic regression analysis. In all, 6638 patients
aged >
60 years were included. Worsening American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade (p <
0.001), increased age (p <
0.001) and extracapsular fracture
(p <
0.019) increased the risk of 30-day mortality. Increasing mobility score (p = 0.014), mini mental test score
(p <
0.001) and female gender (p = 0.014) improved survival.
After adjusting for these confounders, surgery before 12 hours improved
survival compared with surgery after 12 hours (p = 0.013). Beyond
this the increasing delay to surgery did not significantly affect
the 30-day mortality. Cite this article:
To study the measurement properties of a joint specific patient
reported outcome measure, a measure of capability and a general
health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tool in a large cohort of
patients with a hip fracture. Responsiveness and associations between the Oxford Hip Score
(a hip specific measure: OHS), ICEpop CAPability (a measure of capability
in older people: ICECAP-O) and EuroQol EQ-5D (general health-related
quality of life measure: EQ-5D) were assessed using data available
from two large prospective studies. The three outcome measures were assessed
concurrently at a number of fixed follow-up time-points in a consecutive
sequence of patients, allowing direct assessment of change from
baseline, inter-measure associations and validity using a range
of statistical methods.Objectives
Methods