Literature DB >> 7645435

Cost analysis of fracture of the neck of femur.

F H French1, D J Torgerson, R W Porter.   

Abstract

A detailed cost analysis of fractures of the neck of femur in elderly patients has been conducted at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary. The aims of this study were as follows: (1) to show that the use of average orthopaedic bed day costs can lead to an overestimation of costs; (2) to identify the key explanatory variables of hip fracture costs; and (3) to identify differences in resource consumption between patient groups. The care of 50 first and ten second (contralateral) hip fracture patients admitted to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary in 1993 was costed in considerable detail. Acute care, convalescence, rehabilitation and operations accounted for more than 90% of total costs in both groups. It was found that patients who were admitted from their own homes cost significantly more than patients who were admitted from long-term care (4018 pounds vs. 2069 pounds; p < 0.001). In order to validate the costed samples, additional data were collected on all hip fracture patients admitted to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary in 1993. The main factors in explaining cost variation were the number of days spent in acute care and convalescence or rehabilitation [r2 = 0.62; logcost = (0.009 x acute days) + (0.01 x rehabilitation days) + 3.213]. Age and place of residence prior to admission explained a further 2.8% of total costs but neither variable was statistically significant. When costing fractures of the neck of femur, we recommend the collection of a minimum data set of these four variables which account for 65% of the variation in total costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7645435     DOI: 10.1093/ageing/24.3.185

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Age Ageing        ISSN: 0002-0729            Impact factor:   10.668


  8 in total

1.  Cognitive plasticity as a moderator of functional dependency in elderly patients hospitalized for bone fractures.

Authors:  M J Calero-García; M D Calero; E Navarro; A R Ortega
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.281

Review 2.  Hip fracture prevention: cost-effective strategies.

Authors:  P Vestergaard; L Rejnmark; L Mosekilde
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Estimation of direct unit costs associated with non-vertebral osteoporotic fractures in five European countries.

Authors:  S Bouee; A Lafuma; F Fagnani; P J Meunier; J Y Reginster
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2006-09-05       Impact factor: 2.631

Review 4.  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

5.  Cost-effectiveness of hip protectors in frail institutionalized elderly.

Authors:  Natasja M van Schoor; Martine C de Bruyne; Nicole van der Roer; Els Lommerse; Maurits W van Tulder; Lex M Bouter; Paul Lips
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Burden of hip fracture on inpatient care: a before and after population-based study.

Authors:  A Duclos; S Couray-Targe; M Randrianasolo; S Hedoux; C M Couris; C Colin; A M Schott
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Managing osteoporosis in patients with fragility fractures: did the British Orthopaedic Association guidelines have any impact?

Authors:  M F Nixon; T Ibrahim; Y Johari; S Eltayef; D Hariharan; G J Taylor
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  [Proximal femoral fractures in the elderly. Data from health insurance providers on more than 23 million insured persons--part 2].

Authors:  U Frerichmann; M J Raschke; U Stöckle; S Wöhrmann; R Lohmann
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.000

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.