Aims. We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture. Methods. Of 1,577 consecutive patients aged > 65 years with a fragility hip fracture admitted to one institution, for whom there were complete data, 1,255 (72%) were studied. Clinicians assigned CFS scores on admission. Audit personnel routinely prospectively completed the Standardised Audit of Hip Fracture in Europe form, including the following outcomes: 30-day survival; in-hospital complications; length of acute hospital stay; and new institutionalization. The relationship between the CFS scores and outcomes was examined graphically and the visual interpretations were tested statistically. The predictive values of the CFS and Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) to predict 30-day mortality were compared using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Results. Significant non-linear associations between CFS and outcomes were observed. Risk of death within 30 days rose linearly for CFS 1 to 5, but plateaued for CFS > 5. The incidence of complications and length of stay rose linearly for CFS 1 to 4, but plateaued for CFS > 4. In contrast, the risk of new institutionalization rose linearly for CFS 1 to 8. The AUCs for 30-day mortality for the CFS and NHFS were very similar: CFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69) and NHFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69). Conclusion. Use of the CFS may provide useful information on outcomes for fitter patients presenting with hip fracture, but completion of the CFS by the admitting orthopaedic team does not appear successful in distinguishing between higher CFS categories, which define patients with frailty. This makes a strong case for the role of the
The aim of this study was to explore current use of the Global Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) Minimum Common Dataset (MCD) within established national hip fracture registries, and to propose a revised MCD to enable international benchmarking for hip fracture care. We compared all ten established national hip fracture registries: England, Wales, and Northern Ireland; Scotland; Australia and New Zealand; Republic of Ireland; Germany; the Netherlands; Sweden; Norway; Denmark; and Spain. We tabulated all questions included in each registry, and cross-referenced them against the 32 questions of the MCD dataset. Having identified those questions consistently used in the majority of national audits, and which additional fields were used less commonly, we then used consensus methods to establish a revised MCD.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine the impact of hospital-level service characteristics on hip fracture outcomes and quality of care processes measures. This was a retrospective analysis of publicly available audit data obtained from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) 2018 benchmark summary and Facilities Survey. Data extraction was performed using a dedicated proforma to identify relevant hospital-level care process and outcome variables for inclusion. The primary outcome measure was adjusted 30-day mortality rate. A random forest-based multivariate imputation by chained equation (MICE) algorithm was used for missing value imputation. Univariable analysis for each hospital level factor was performed using a combination of Tobit regression, Siegal non-parametric linear regression, and Mann-Whitney U test analyses, dependent on the data type. In all analyses, a p-value < 0.05 denoted statistical significance.Aims
Methods
This study sought to determine the proportion of older adults with hip fractures captured by a multicentre prospective cohort, the World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE), whether there was evidence of selection bias during WHiTE recruitment, and the extent to which the WHiTE cohort is representative of the broader population of older adults with hip fractures. The characteristics of patients recruited into the WHiTE cohort study were compared with those treated at WHiTE hospitals during the same timeframe and submitted to the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD).Aims
Patients and Methods
Hip fractures are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and costs. One strategy for improving outcomes is to incentivize hospitals to provide better quality of care. We aimed to determine whether a pay-for-performance initiative affected hip fracture outcomes in England by using Scotland, which did not participate in the scheme, as a control. We undertook an interrupted time series study with data from all patients aged more than 60 years with a hip fracture in England (2000 to 2018) using the Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care (HES APC) data set linked to national death registrations. Difference-in-differences (DID) analysis incorporating equivalent data from the Scottish Morbidity Record was used to control for secular trends. The outcomes were 30-day and 365-day mortality, 30-day re-admission, time to operation, and acute length of stay.Aims
Materials and Methods
Approximately half of all hip fractures are displaced intracapsular fractures. The standard treatment for these fractures is either hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. The recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on hip fracture management recommends the use of ‘proven’ cemented stem arthroplasty with an Orthopaedic Device Evaluation Panel (ODEP) rating of at least 3B (97% survival at three years). The Thompsons prosthesis is currently lacking an ODEP rating despite over 50 years of clinical use, likely due to the paucity of implant survival data. Nationally, adherence to these guidelines is varied as there is debate as to which prosthesis optimises patient outcomes. This study design is a multi-centre, multi-surgeon, parallel, two arm, standard-of-care pragmatic randomised controlled trial. It will be embedded within the WHiTE Comprehensive Cohort Study (ISRCTN63982700). The main analysis is a two-way equivalence comparison between Hemi-Thompson and Hemi-Exeter polished taper with Unitrax head. Secondary outcomes will include radiological leg length discrepancy measured as per Bidwai and Willett, mortality, re-operation rate and indication for re-operation, length of index hospital stay and revision at four months. This study will be supplemented by the NHFD (National Hip Fracture Database) dataset.Background
Design
We retrospectively reviewed 2989 consecutive
patients with a mean age of 81 (21 to 105) and a female to male
ratio of 5:2 who were admitted to our hip fracture unit between
July 2009 and February 2013. We compared weekday and weekend admission
and weekday and weekend surgery 30-day mortality rates for hip fractures
treated both surgically and conservatively. After adjusting for
confounders, weekend admission was independently and significantly
associated with a rise in 30-day mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.4,
95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.9; p = 0.039) for patients
undergoing hip fracture surgery. There was no increase in mortality
associated with weekend surgery (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.7; p =
0.39). All hip fracture patients, whether managed surgically or
conservatively, were more likely to die as an inpatient when admitted
at the weekend (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.80; p = 0.032), despite
our unit having a comparatively low overall inpatient mortality
(8.7%). Hip fracture patients admitted over the weekend appear to
have a greater risk of death despite having a consultant-led service. Cite this article:
