Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 2 | Pages 226 - 232
1 Feb 2018
Basques BA McLynn RP Lukasiewicz AM Samuel AM Bohl DD Grauer JN

Aims

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 and Methods

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.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1216 - 1222
1 Sep 2017
Fu MC Boddapati V Gausden EB Samuel AM Russell LA Lane JM

Aims

We aimed to characterise the effect of expeditious hip fracture surgery in elderly patients within 24 hours of admission on short-term post-operative outcomes.

Patients and Methods

Patients age 65 or older that underwent surgery for closed femoral neck and intertrochanteric hip fractures were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program between 2011 and 2014. Multivariable propensity-adjusted logistic regressions were performed to determine associations between early surgery within 24 hours and post-operative complications, controlling for selection bias in patients undergoing early surgery based on observable characteristics.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 3 | Pages 425 - 432
1 Mar 2016
Samuel AM Lukasiewicz AM Webb ML Bohl DD Basques BA Varthi AG Leslie MP Grauer JN

Aims

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 and Methods

Patients were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB).


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 5 | Pages 689 - 695
1 May 2015
Basques BA Bohl DD Golinvaux NS Samuel AM Grauer JG

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: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:689–95.