Mortality following fragility hip fracture in China: a record linkage study

Improving morbidity and mortality in hip fragility fractures

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hip fragility fractures (HFF) carry high morbidity and mortality for patients and will increase in frequency and in proportion to the average patient age. Provision of effective, timely care for these patients can decrease their morbidity and mortality and reduce the large burden they place on the healthcare system.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are associative relationships between prefracture frailty, postoperative delirium and increased morbidity and mortality. The use of a multidisciplinary approach to HFF care has shown improved outcomes in care with focus on modifiable factors including admission to specialty care floor, use of peripheral nerve blocks preoperatively and Anesthesia and Physical Therapy involvement in the care team. Peripheral nerve blocks including pericapsular nerve group (PENG) blocks have shown benefit in lowering morbidity and mortality.

SUMMARY

HFF are associated with >40% chance of continued pain and inability to return to prefracture functional status at 1 year as well as >30% mortality at 2 years. In this opinion piece, we will discuss how a multidisciplinary approach that includes Anesthesia as well as utilization of peripheral nerve blocks can help to lessen postoperative issues and improve recovery.

Risk prediction models of mortality after hip fracture surgery in older individuals: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to critically assess existing risk prediction models for postoperative mortality in older individuals with hip fractures, with the objective of offering substantive insights for their clinical application.

DESIGN

A comprehensive search was conducted across prominent databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang, spanning original articles in both Chinese and English up until 1 December 2023. Two researchers independently extracted pertinent research characteristics, such as predictors, model performance metrics, and modeling methodologies. Additionally, the bias risk and applicability of the incorporated risk prediction models were systematically evaluated using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST).

RESULTS

Within the purview of this investigation, a total of 21 studies were identified, constituting 21 original risk prediction models. The discriminatory capacity of the included risk prediction models, as denoted by the minimum and maximum areas under the subject operating characteristic curve, ranged from 0.710 to 0.964. Noteworthy predictors, recurrent across various models, included age, sex, comorbidities, and nutritional status. However, among the models assessed through the PROBAST framework, only one was deemed to exhibit a low risk of bias. Beyond this assessment, the principal limitations observed in risk prediction models pertain to deficiencies in data analysis, encompassing insufficient sample size and suboptimal handling of missing data.

CONCLUSION

Subsequent research endeavors should adopt more stringent experimental designs and employ advanced statistical methodologies in the construction of risk prediction models. Moreover, large-scale external validation studies are warranted to rigorously assess the generalizability and clinical utility of existing models, thereby enhancing their relevance as valuable clinical references.