Trevor Shelton1, Garin Hecht, Christina Slee, Philip Wolinsky. 1. From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (Dr. Shelton and Dr. Wolinsky), University of California, Sacramento, CA, the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation (Dr. Hecht), Loyola University, Chicago, IL, and the Department of Quality and Safety (Ms. Slee), University of California, Sacramento, CA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) and the Trauma Quality Improvement Project (TQIP) collect data on geriatric hip fractures (GHFs) that could be used to generate risk-adjusted metrics for care of these patients. We examined differences between GHFs reported by our own trauma center to the NSQIP and TQIP and those vetted through an internal GHF list. METHODS: We reviewed charts of GHFs treated between January 1 and December 31, 2015, and compared patients in an internal GHF database and/or reported to the NSQIP and/or TQIP and determined differences between databases. RESULTS: We identified 89 "true" GHFs, of which 96% were identified by our institutional database, 70% by NSQIP, and 9% by the TQIP. No differences were found in outcomes and total costs. The net revenue/patient in the NSQIP database was $24,373 more than those in the institutional database. CONCLUSION: Caution should be taken when using NSQIP/TQIP databases to evaluate the care of GHFs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
INTRODUCTION: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) and the Trauma Quality Improvement Project (TQIP) collect data on geriatric hip fractures (GHFs) that could be used to generate risk-adjusted metrics for care of these patients. We examined differences between GHFs reported by our own trauma center to the NSQIP and TQIP and those vetted through an internal GHF list. METHODS: We reviewed charts of GHFs treated between January 1 and December 31, 2015, and compared patients in an internal GHF database and/or reported to the NSQIP and/or TQIP and determined differences between databases. RESULTS: We identified 89 "true" GHFs, of which 96% were identified by our institutional database, 70% by NSQIP, and 9% by the TQIP. No differences were found in outcomes and total costs. The net revenue/patient in the NSQIP database was $24,373 more than those in the institutional database. CONCLUSION: Caution should be taken when using NSQIP/TQIP databases to evaluate the care of GHFs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.