Evaluation of the volume-value relationship in hip fracture care using evidence-based thresholds

Is hospital volume related to quality of hip fracture care? Analysis of 43,538 patients and 68 hospitals from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit

PURPOSE

Evidence for a hospital volume-outcome relationship in hip fracture surgery is inconclusive. This study aimed to analyze the association between hospital volume as a continuous parameter and several processes and outcomes of hip fracture care.

METHODS

Adult patients registered in the nationwide Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA) between 2018 and 2020 were included. The association between annual hospital volume and turnaround times (time on the emergency ward, surgery < 48 h and length of stay), orthogeriatric co-treatment and case-mix adjusted in-hospital and 30 days mortality was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models with random effects for hospital and treatment year. We used a fifth-degree polynomial to allow for nonlinear effects of hospital volume. P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferoni method.

RESULTS

In total, 43,258 patients from 68 hospitals were included. The median annual hospital volume was 202 patients [range 1-546]. Baseline characteristics did not differ with hospital volume. Provision of orthogeriatric co-treatment improved with higher volumes but decreased at > 367 patients per year (p < 0.01). Hospital volume was not significantly associated with mortality outcomes. No evident clinical relation between hospital volume and turnaround times was found.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study analyzing the effect of hospital volume on hip fracture care, treating volume as a continuous parameter. Mortality and turnaround times showed no clinically relevant association with hospital volume. The provision of orthogeriatric co-treatment, however, increased with increasing volumes up to 367 patients per year, but decreased above this threshold. Future research on the effect of volume on complications and functional outcomes is indicated.

The BTK Safety Score: A Novel Scoring System for Risk Stratifying Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty

Selection of appropriate candidates for simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty (si-BTKA) is crucial for minimizing postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to develop a scoring system for identifying patients who may be appropriate for si-BTKA. Patients who underwent si-BTKA were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients who experienced a major 30-day complication were identified as high-risk patients for si-BTKA who potentially would have benefitted from staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty. Major complications included deep wound infection, pneumonia, renal insufficiency or failure, cerebrovascular accident, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, or death. The predictive model was trained using randomly split 70% of the dataset and validated on the remaining 30%. The scoring system was compared against the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and legacy risk-stratification measures, using area under the curve (AUC) statistic. Total 4,630 patients undergoing si-BTKA were included in our cohort. In our model, patients are assigned points based on the following risk factors: +1 for age ≥ 75, +2 for age ≥ 82, +1 for body mass index (BMI) ≥ 34, +2 for BMI ≥ 42, +1 for hypertension requiring medication, +1 for pulmonary disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or dyspnea), and +3 for end-stage renal disease. The scoring system exhibited an AUC of 0.816, which was significantly higher than the AUC of ASA (0.545; p < 0.001) and CCI (0.599; p < 0.001). The BTK Safety Score developed and validated in our study can be used by surgeons and perioperative teams to risk stratify patients undergoing si-BTKA. Future work is needed to assess this scoring system's ability to predict long-term functional outcomes.

Total Hip Arthroplasty for Acute Femoral Neck Fractures: Who Should Perform the Operation-Adult Reconstructive or Trauma Surgeons?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the results and complications of a large consecutive series of total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed for acute femoral neck (FN) fracture by adult reconstructive (AR) and trauma (T) surgeons to determine if there is a difference in outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENTS

One hundred forty-nine consecutive patients who presented to our institution with displaced FN fractures treated by THA were included in this study.

INTERVENTION

All patients were treated with THA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Implant survival, 90-day complications, 90-day readmission, 1-year complications.

RESULTS

For the group as a whole, the major surgical complication rate (defined as dislocation, deep infection, loosening, fracture) was significantly higher for T surgeons (20%) than for AR surgeons (7%) (P = 0.021). AR surgeons had significantly less radiographic component malpositioning 12% versus 3% (P = 0.024). Mortality and readmission rates were similar between the 2 cohorts at all time points. Implant survivorship was significantly higher at 1 year for AR surgeons (P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

THA for acute FN fracture performed by AR surgeons demonstrated higher rates of accurate radiographic component positioning, significantly lower major complication rates at 90 days and 1 year, and greater implant survival at 1 year.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.