Literature DB >> 36161538

Geographic variation in hip fracture surgery rate, care quality and outcomes: a comparison between national registries in Ireland and Denmark.

Mary E Walsh1, Jan Sorensen2, Catherine Blake3, Søren Paaske Johnsen4, Pia Kjær Kristensen5.   

Abstract

Ireland and Denmark have similar hip fracture surgery rates but differences in care quality indicators and patterns of intracapsular fracture repair. Very high variation in total hip arthroplasty rate within both countries and higher observed early mortality in Denmark require further investigation.
PURPOSE: To explore and compare geographic variation of hip fracture surgery rate, care quality and outcomes in Ireland and Denmark.
METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 65 years with surgically treated hip fracture were included from the Irish Hip Fracture Database (years = 2017-2020, n = 12,904) and the Danish Multidisciplinary Hip Fracture Registry (years = 2016-2017, n = 12,924). The age and sex standardised rate of hip fracture surgery and the proportion of patients with seven process quality indicators, three surgery types and four outcomes were calculated. Systematic components of variation (SCV) were calculated based on hospital area (6 Irish hospital groups, 5 Danish regions).
RESULTS: The age and sex standardised rate of hip fracture surgery per 1000 older population in 2017 was 4.7 (95% CI = 4.4-5.1) in Ireland and 5.3 (95% CI = 5.1-5.5) in Denmark. Ireland had lower rates of surgery within 36 h (59% versus 84%), nutritional assessment (27% versus 84%) and pre-discharge mobility recording (52% versus 92%). Patterns of intracapsular fracture repair also differed between countries (hemiarthroplasty: Ireland = 85%, Denmark = 52%). Both countries had very high variation for total hip arthroplasty (THA) provision (SCV Ireland = 10.6, Denmark = 97.9). Ireland had longer hospital stays (median 12 versus 7 days), but lower 7-day (1.0% versus 3.1%) and 14-day (2.0% versus 5.5%) mortality.
CONCLUSION: Ireland and Denmark have similar hip fracture surgery rates, but differences in care quality, surgery patterns and outcomes. High variation in THA provision and observed differences in mortality require further exploration. In Ireland, there is scope for improvement regarding early surgery, mobility, nutrition assessment and improved post-discharge follow-up.
© 2022. International Osteoporosis Foundation and Bone Health and Osteoporosis Foundation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Femoral fracture; Geographic variation; Hip fracture; Mortality; Quality of health care

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36161538     DOI: 10.1007/s11657-022-01169-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Osteoporos            Impact factor:   2.879


  30 in total

Review 1.  Addressing unwarranted clinical variation: A rapid review of current evidence.

Authors:  Reema Harrison; Elizabeth Manias; Stephen Mears; David Heslop; Reece Hinchcliff; Liz Hay
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 2.431

Review 2.  Costs of fragility hip fractures globally: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Authors:  S Williamson; F Landeiro; T McConnell; L Fulford-Smith; M K Javaid; A Judge; J Leal
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Practice variation in total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for treatment of fractured neck of femur in Australia.

Authors:  I A Harris; A Cuthbert; R de Steiger; P Lewis; S E Graves
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 5.082

4.  Hip fractures in the elderly: a world-wide projection.

Authors:  C Cooper; G Campion; L J Melton
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Trends in hip fracture care in the Republic of Ireland from 2013 to 2018: results from the Irish Hip Fracture Database.

Authors:  M E Walsh; H Ferris; T Coughlan; C Hurson; E Ahern; J Sorensen; L Brent
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Bone mineral density measurement and osteoporosis treatment after a fragility fracture in older adults: regional variation and determinants of use in Quebec.

Authors:  Alain Vanasse; Pierre Dagenais; Théophile Niyonsenga; Jean-Pierre Grégoire; Josiane Courteau; Abbas Hemiari
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Quality indicators for hip fracture care, a systematic review.

Authors:  S C Voeten; P Krijnen; D M Voeten; J H Hegeman; M W J M Wouters; I B Schipper
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Changing trends in the mortality rate at 1-year post hip fracture - a systematic review.

Authors:  Colum Downey; Martin Kelly; John F Quinlan
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2019-03-18

9.  The Danish Multidisciplinary Hip Fracture Registry 13-Year Results from a Population-Based Cohort of Hip Fracture Patients.

Authors:  Pia Kjær Kristensen; Niels Dieter Röck; Helle Collatz Christensen; Alma Becic Pedersen
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.790

Review 10.  Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries.

Authors:  Maic Werner; Christian Macke; Manfred Gogol; Christian Krettek; Emmanouil Liodakis
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 2.374

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.