Management of elderly hip fractures by an orthopaedic trauma surgeon reduces surgical delays but does not improve outcomes compared to non-trauma surgeons

Evaluation of Systemwide Improvement Programs to Optimize Time to Surgery for Patients With Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Longer time to surgery (TTS) for hip fractures has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and mortality. Given that more than 300 000 adults are hospitalized for hip fractures in the United States each year, various improvement programs have been implemented to reduce TTS with variable results, attributed to contextual patient- and system-level factors.

OBJECTIVE

To catalog TTS improvement programs, identify their results, and categorize program strategies according to Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), highlighting components of successful improvement programs within their associated contexts and seeking to guide health care systems in implementing programs designed to reduce TTS.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Three databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Trials) were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2021 that reported on improvement programs for hip fracture TTS. Observational studies in high-income country settings, including patients with surgical, low-impact, nonpathological hip fractures aged 50 years or older, were considered for review. Improvement programs were assessed for their association with decreased TTS, and ERIC strategies were matched to improvement program components.

FINDINGS

Preliminary literature searches yielded 1683 articles, of which 69 articles were included for final analysis. Among the 69 improvement programs, 49 were associated with significantly decreased TTS, and 20 programs did not report significant decreases in TTS. Among 49 successful improvement programs, the 5 most common ERIC strategies were (1) assess for readiness and identify barriers and facilitators, (2) develop a formal implementation blueprint, (3) identify and prepare champions, (4) promote network weaving, and (5) develop resource-sharing agreements.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review, certain components (eg, identifying barriers and facilitators to program implementation, developing a formal implementation blueprint, preparing intervention champions) are common among improvement programs that were associated with reducing TTS and may inform the approach of hospital systems developing similar programs. Other strategies had mixed results, suggesting local contextual factors (eg, operating room availability) may affect their success. To contextualize the success of a given improvement program across different clinical settings, subsequent investigation must elucidate the association between interventional success and facility-level factors influencing TTS, such as hospital census and type, teaching status, annual surgical volume, and other factors.

Variation in treatment of hip fractures and guideline adherence amongst surgeons with different training backgrounds in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Two medical specialties, general surgery and orthopaedic surgery, with different training programs but matching trauma certification requirements, provide hip fracture surgery in the Netherlands. This study analyses treatment preferences and guideline adherence of Dutch surgeons with different surgical backgrounds.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All hip fracture patients registered in the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit in 2018 and 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Four types of surgeons were distinguished: trauma-certified general surgeons (ST+), non-trauma certified general surgeons (ST-), trauma-certified orthopaedic surgeons (OT+) and non-trauma certified orthopaedic surgeons (OT-). Differences in patient characteristics, and practice variation in treatment choices and guideline adherence per fracture type were analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

28,656 patients were included; 16,367 (57.1%) treated by ST+, 1,371 (4.8%) by ST-, 4,692 (16.4%) by OT+ and 6,226 (21.7%) by OT-. Few clinically relevant differences in patient characteristics and hospital processes were found between all surgeon groups. Displaced FNF were the most commonly treated fracture type for all types of surgeons. Both OT+ and OT- operated mostly (displaced) FNFs, while the fracture types treated by ST+ and ST- were more heterogeneous. For all fracture types, the orthopaedic surgeons performed THA and HA more often than general surgeons, while general surgeons more often placed SHS and IMN for specific fracture types. Guideline adherence was on average 68.4% and differed significantly per surgeon type (68.7% by ST+, 65.2% by ST-, 74.4% by OT+ and 63.6% by OT- (p<0.01)), as well as per fracture type: >90% treatment according to the guideline for trochanteric AO-31A2 and A3 fractures, 18.8% for AO-31A1 fractures and 51.7% guideline adherence for undisplaced FNF. Guideline adherence for displaced FNF varied depending on patient characteristics.

DISCUSSION

In the Netherlands, different surgical specialists treat different types of hip fractures and have different preferences concerning implants for hip fracture surgery in comparable patients. Guideline adherence of trauma- and non-trauma certified orthopaedics and general surgeons differs significantly. Reduction of practice variation should be strived for in order to improve hip fracture care.

The case for decreased surgeon-reported complications due to surgical volume and fellowship status in the treatment of geriatric hip fracture: An analysis of the ABOS database

Introduction

American orthopaedists are increasingly seeking fellowship sub-specialization. One proposed benefit of fellowship training is decrease in complications, however, few studies have investigated the rates of medical and surgical complications for hip fracture patients between orthopedists from different fellowship backgrounds. This study aims to investigate the effect of fellowship training and case volume on medical and surgical outcomes of patient following hip fracture surgical intervention.

Methods

1999–2016 American Board of Orthopedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II Examination Case List data were used to assess patients treated by trauma or adult reconstruction fellowship-trained orthopedists versus all-other orthopaedists. Rates of surgeon-reported medical and surgical adverse events were compared between the three surgeon cohorts. Using binary multivariate logistic regression to control of demographic factors, independent factors were evaluated for their effect on surgical complications.

Results

Data from 73,427 patients were assessed. An increasing number of hip fractures are being treated by trauma fellowship trained surgeons (9.43% in 1999–2004 to 60.92% in 2011–2016). In multivariate analysis, there was no significant difference in type of fellowship, however, surgeons with increased case volume saw significantly decreased odds of complications (16–30 cases: OR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.85–0.97; p = 0.003; 31+ cases: OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.61–0.76; p<0.001). Femoral neck hip fractures were associated with increased odds of surgical complications.

Discussion

Despite minor differences in incidence of surgical complications between different fellowship trained orthopaedists, there is no major difference in overall risk of surgical complications for hip fracture patients based on fellowship status of early orthopaedic surgeons. However, case volume does significantly decrease the risk of surgical complications among these patients and may stand as a proxy for fellowship training. Fellows required to take hip fracture call as part of their training regardless of fellowship status exhibited decreased complication risk for hip fracture patients, thus highlighting the importance of additional training.

Patient, surgical and hospital factors associated with the presence of a consultant surgeon during hip fracture surgery. Do we know the answer?

BACKGROUND

Provision of quality care can help to reduce adverse health outcomes following hip fracture. While surgical management by either a consultant or junior surgeon has shown inconclusive differences in patient outcomes, consultant presence is often recommended, yet little is known about the factors that influence whether a consultant surgeon is present during hip fracture surgery. The aim of this study is to examine patient, surgical and hospital factors associated with having a consultant surgeon present during hip fracture surgery.

METHODS

An examination of hip fracture surgeries of adults aged ≥ 50 years admitted to hospitals in Australia and New Zealand between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2018 using data from the Australia and New Zealand Hip Fracture Registry was conducted. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with the presence of a consultant surgeon during hip fracture surgery.

RESULTS

There were 29 530 hip fracture surgeries 58.1% had a consultant surgeon present (range 8.5-100% by hospital). Patients were more likely to have a consultant surgeon present during surgery if they had private health insurance, were operated on after hours, required total hip replacements or were operated on in hospitals that conducted ≤150 surgeries per year.

CONCLUSION

There is variation in the presence of consultant surgeons within Australia and New Zealand during hip fracture surgery, potentially associated with the complexity of surgery and hospital factors. However, further research is needed to determine the optimum level of supervision required based on patient factors and surgical complexity.