Utilization and costs of formal and informal care, home adaptations, and physiotherapy among older patients with hip fracture

Efficacy of surgical intervention over conservative management in intertrochanteric fractures among nonagenarians and centenarians: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Optimal treatment strategy for nonagenarians and centenarians with hip fractures (NCHF) remained unknown. The authors aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and conservative management in NCHF.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted based on CPMHF database with NCHF patients hospitalized during 2014-2020. Comorbidities were evaluated by mECM score and restricted cubic spline was utilized to visually assess the dose-effect relationship between the mECM and outcomes. Propensity score matching was performed to balance baseline characteristics between nonsurgical and surgical groups. Multivariate logistic regression, Cox proportional hazard analysis, and survival analysis were employed for unfavorable outcomes (UFO) evaluation. Competing risk of death were analyzed based on Fine and Gray's hazard model and then constructed nomogram models for predicting survival rates. Subgroup analyses were used to determine potential population heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses were performed to test robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The authors found increasing trends for UFO with the increase in the mECM score, and that high mECM score (HMS, ≥3) was independently associated with a 2.42-fold (95% CI: 2.07-3.54; P =0.024) increased risk of UFO, which remained significant after considering the competing role of death and were more pronounced in nonsurgical treatment, women, no insurance, and patients with spouse (all P for interaction <0.05). Surgical intervention was identified to be significant protective factors for UFO (RR, 0.59; 95% CI: 0.46-0.75; P <0.001) and severe complications (RR, 0.63; 95% CI: 0.41-0.96; P =0.033) after propensity score matching, as well as survival (HR, 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.58; P <0.001), which remained significant after considering the competing role of death and in all sensitivity analyses and were more pronounced in HMS participants ( P for interaction=0.006). Subgroup analyses revealed surgical patients with HMS had a significantly higher UFO rate (excluding death, P <0.001) while nonsurgical patients with HMS had higher mortality rate as compared to the others ( P =0.005).

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment for NCHF yields better outcomes compared to conservative treatment.

Cost-utility analysis of dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults

Aims

To compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

Methods

Using data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial (World Hip Trauma Evaluation 8 (WHiTE-8)) in the UK, a within-trial economic evaluation was conducted. Resource usage was measured over 120 days post randomization, and cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), gained from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective in the base-case analysis. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Results

The base-case analysis showed that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement had a significantly higher mean cost (£224 (95% confidence interval (CI) -408 to 855)) and almost the same QALYs (0.001 (95% CI -0.002 to 0.003)) relative to single-antibiotic cement from the UK NHS and PSS perspective. The probability of the high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement being cost-effective was less than 0.3 at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds, and its net monetary benefit was negative. This finding remained robust in the sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

This study shows that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement is unlikely to be cost-effective compared to single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

The incidence of musculoskeletal injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather epidemiological information on selected musculoskeletal injuries and to provide pooled injury-specific incidence rates.

Methods

PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Scopus (Elsevier) databases were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported incidence rate (or count with population at risk), contained data on adult population, and were written in English language. The number of cases and population at risk were collected, and the pooled incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using either a fixed or random effects model.

Results

The screening of titles yielded 206 articles eligible for inclusion in the study. Of these, 173 (84%) articles provided sufficient information to be included in the pooled incidence rates. Incidences of fractures were investigated in 154 studies, and the most common fractures in the whole adult population based on the pooled incidence rates were distal radius fractures (212.0, 95% CI 178.1 to 252.4 per 100,000 person-years), finger fractures (117.1, 95% CI 105.3 to 130.2 per 100,000 person-years), and hip fractures (112.9, 95% CI 82.2 to 154.9 per 100,000 person-years). The most common sprains and dislocations were ankle sprains (429.4, 95% CI 243.0 to 759.0 per 100,000 person-years) and first-time patellar dislocations (32.8, 95% CI 21.6 to 49.7 per 100,000 person-years). The most common injuries were anterior cruciate ligament (17.5, 95% CI 6.0 to 50.2 per 100,000 person-years) and Achilles (13.7, 95% CI 9.6 to 19.5 per 100,000 person-years) ruptures.

Conclusion

The presented pooled incidence estimates serve as important references in assessing the global economic and social burden of musculoskeletal injuries. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(11):814–825.

Cost-utility analysis of cemented hemiarthroplasty versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures : the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) trial

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

METHODS

A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted based on data collected from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK. Resource use was measured over 12 months post-randomization using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the NHS and personal social service perspective. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was represented graphically using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis showed that cemented implants were cost-saving (mean cost difference -£961 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£2,292 to £370)) and increased QALYs (mean QALY difference 0.010 (95% CI 0.002 to 0.017)) when compared to uncemented implants. The probability of the cemented implant being cost-effective approximated between 95% and 97% at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds held by decision-makers, and its net monetary benefit was positive. The findings remained robust against all the pre-planned sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that cemented HA is cost-effective compared with hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA in older adults with displaced intracapsular hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):922-928.

Improving bone health: addressing the burden through an integrated approach

As people age, maintaining mobility becomes increasingly imperative, therefore addressing bone health is the most important way to preserve mobility. Poor bone health encompasses a broad spectrum of diseases, but it is most often quantified as the cumulative burden of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures. Rates of these fractures have been increasing and are expected to continue rising globally, attributed to increasing life expectancy worldwide. No single strategy will be sufficient to address this global public health issue. Co-ordination across a wide array of stakeholders is vital to decrease the health and socioeconomic burden of poor bone health. Stakeholders include an assortment of specialists ranging from health professionals (primary and secondary care clinicians, nurses, physical therapists, and social care workers), policy-makers, government bodies (including departments of health and social services), employers, civil society, as well as patients and their caregivers.  We need to ensure that there is a better understanding of the socioeconomic and health consequences of poor bone health to promote better policies to address needs. Building a more resilient health system approach to bone health based on the evidence and sound decision-making will not only improve population health, but will provide cost savings to health systems by preventing poor bone health in the first place. Health systems around the world must prioritise bone health to preserve mobility and wellbeing in advance of the impending surge in demand from ageing populations. Poor bone health is not an inevitable part of ageing. Working across the lifespan, we can all benefit from improved bone health throughout our lives.

Economic evaluation plan of a RCT of hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented hemiarthroplasty versus cemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures: the WHiTE5 trial

Aim

This paper describes the methods applied to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty among hip fracture patients in the World Hip Trauma Evaluation Five (WHiTE5) trial.

Methods

A within-trial cost-utility analysis (CUA) will be conducted at four months postinjury from a health system (National Health Service and personal social services) perspective. Resource use pertaining to healthcare utilization (i.e. inpatient care, physiotherapy, social care, and home adaptations), and utility measures (quality-adjusted life years) will be collected at one and four months (primary outcome endpoint) postinjury; only treatment of complications will be captured at 12 months. Sensitivity analysis will be conducted to assess the robustness of the results.

Conclusion

The planned analysis strategy described here records our intent to conduct a within-trial CUA alongside the WHiTE5 trial.