Geriatric fracture centre vs usual care after proximal femur fracture in older patients: what are the benefits? Results of a large international prospective multicentre study
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the effect of treatment in geriatric fracture centres (GFC) on the incidence of major adverse events (MAEs) in patients with hip fractures compared with usual care centres (UCC). Secondary objectives included hospital-workflow and mobility-related outc...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Data de publicação: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Conselleria de Salut i Consum del Govern de les Illes Balears |
| Repositório: | Docusalut |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:docusalut.com:20.500.13003/19606 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13003/19606 |
| Access Level: | Acceso aberto |
| Palavra-chave: | Aged, 80 and over Aged Quality of Life Prospective Studies Femur Humans Cohort Studies Hip Fractures Fémur Estudios de Cohortes Fracturas de Cadera Humanos Calidad de Vida Estudios Prospectivos Anciano Anciano de 80 o más Años trauma management hip geriatric medicine orthopaedic & trauma surgery health services administration & management |
| Resumo: | ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the effect of treatment in geriatric fracture centres (GFC) on the incidence of major adverse events (MAEs) in patients with hip fractures compared with usual care centres (UCC). Secondary objectives included hospital-workflow and mobility-related outcomes.DesignCohort study recruiting patients between June 2015 and January 2017. Follow-up was 1year.SettingInternational (six countries, three continents) multicentre study.Participants281 patients aged >= 70 with operatively treated proximal femur fractures.InterventionsTreatment in UCCs (n=139) or GFCs (n=142), that is, interdisciplinary treatment including regular geriatric consultation and daily physiotherapy.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome was occurrence of prespecified MAEs, including delirium. Secondary outcomes included any other adverse events, time to surgery, time in acute ward, 1-year mortality, mobility, and quality of life.ResultsPatients treated in GFCs (n=142) had a mean age of 81.9 (SD, 6.6) years versus 83.9 (SD 6.9) years in patients (n=139) treated in UCCs (p=0.013) and a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2.0 (SD, 2.1) versus 1.2 (SD, 1.5) in UCCs (p=0.001). More patients in GFCs (28.2%) experienced an MAE during the first year after surgery compared with UCCs (7.9%) with an OR of 4.56 (95% CI 2.23 to 9.34, p<0.001). Analysing individual MAEs, this was significant for pneumonia (GFC: 9.2%; UCC: 2.9%; OR, 3.40 (95% CI 1.08 to 10.70), p=0.027) and delirium (GFC: 11.3%; UCC: 2.2%, OR, 5.76 (95% CI 1.64 to 20.23), p=0.002).ConclusionsContrary to our study hypothesis, the rate of MAEs was higher in GFCs than in UCCs. Delirium was revealed as a main contributor. Most likely, this was based on improved detection rather than a truly elevated incidence, which we interpret as positive effect of geriatric comanagement.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02297581. |
|---|