Natalie Cho1, Laura Boland1, Daniel I McIsaac2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (Cho, McIsaac), and Faculty of Health Sciences (Boland), University of Ottawa; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (McIsaac); ICES (McIsaac), Ottawa, Ont. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (Cho, McIsaac), and Faculty of Health Sciences (Boland), University of Ottawa; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (McIsaac); ICES (McIsaac), Ottawa, Ont. dmcisaac@toh.on.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sex and gender inequality is prevalent in health care, and affects receipt of health care services and outcomes. Our objective was to measure the association between sex and receipt of evidence-based perioperative care for hip fracture in Ontario. METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective cross-sectional analysis. We identified all Ontario residents aged 66 years and older who had hip fracture surgery between 2014 and 2016. After protocol registration, we measured the adjusted association between female sex and perioperative geriatric care (primary outcome), anesthesia consultations, regional analgesia and neuraxial anesthesia (secondary outcomes) using multilevel multivariable adjusted logistic regression. Pre-specified sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: We identified 22 661 patients who had hip fracture surgery; 16 162 (71.3%) were women. Women were less likely to receive perioperative geriatric care (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 0.88) and anesthesia consultations (adjusted OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98); women were more likely to have timely surgery (adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36). Receipt of neuraxial anesthesia (adjusted OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04) and regional analgesia (adjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07) were not different between sexes. INTERPRETATION: More than 2 out of 3 patients who had hip fracture surgery were women; however, women were less likely to receive perioperative geriatric care and anesthesia consultations. Given the effectiveness of these interventions for improving outcomes, population-level hip fracture outcomes may be improved by decreasing sex-based disparities in application of evidence-based recommended perioperative care. Protocol registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT03422497.
BACKGROUND: Sex and gender inequality is prevalent in health care, and affects receipt of health care services and outcomes. Our objective was to measure the association between sex and receipt of evidence-based perioperative care for hip fracture in Ontario. METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective cross-sectional analysis. We identified all Ontario residents aged 66 years and older who had hip fracture surgery between 2014 and 2016. After protocol registration, we measured the adjusted association between female sex and perioperative geriatric care (primary outcome), anesthesia consultations, regional analgesia and neuraxial anesthesia (secondary outcomes) using multilevel multivariable adjusted logistic regression. Pre-specified sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: We identified 22 661 patients who had hip fracture surgery; 16 162 (71.3%) were women. Women were less likely to receive perioperative geriatric care (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 0.88) and anesthesia consultations (adjusted OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98); women were more likely to have timely surgery (adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.36). Receipt of neuraxial anesthesia (adjusted OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04) and regional analgesia (adjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.07) were not different between sexes. INTERPRETATION: More than 2 out of 3 patients who had hip fracture surgery were women; however, women were less likely to receive perioperative geriatric care and anesthesia consultations. Given the effectiveness of these interventions for improving outcomes, population-level hip fracture outcomes may be improved by decreasing sex-based disparities in application of evidence-based recommended perioperative care. Protocol registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT03422497.
Authors: K H Humphries; C R Kerr; S J Connolly; G Klein; J A Boone; M Green; R Sheldon; M Talajic; P Dorian; D Newman Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Duminda N Wijeysundera; Peter C Austin; Janet E Hux; W Scott Beattie; D Norman Buckley; Andreas Laupacis Journal: Med Care Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Nguyen D Nguyen; Henrik G Ahlborg; Jacqueline R Center; John A Eisman; Tuan V Nguyen Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Daniel Pincus; David Wasserstein; Bheeshma Ravi; James P Byrne; Anjie Huang; J Michael Paterson; Avery B Nathens; Hans J Kreder; Richard J Jenkinson; Walter P Wodchis Journal: CMAJ Date: 2018-06-11 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Emil Schemitsch; Jonathan D Adachi; Jacques P Brown; Jean-Eric Tarride; Natasha Burke; Thiago Oliveira; Lubomira Slatkovska Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2021-08-11 Impact factor: 4.507