A Bibliometric Analysis of Fragility Fractures: Top 50

Health-economic evaluation of orthogeriatric co-management for patients with pelvic or vertebral fragility fractures

BACKGROUND

Orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) addresses the special needs of geriatric fracture patients. Most of the research on OGCM focused on hip fractures while results concerning other severe fractures are rare. We conducted a health-economic evaluation of OGCM for pelvic and vertebral fractures.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we used German health and long-term care insurance claims data and included cases of geriatric patients aged 80 years or older treated in an OGCM (OGCM group) or a non-OGCM hospital (non-OGCM group) due to pelvic or vertebral fractures in 2014-2018. We analyzed life years gained, fracture-free life years gained, healthcare costs, and cost-effectiveness within 1 year. We applied entropy balancing, weighted gamma and two-part models. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

We included 21,036 cases with pelvic (71.2% in the OGCM, 28.8% in the non-OGCM group) and 33,827 with vertebral fractures (72.8% OGCM, 27.2% non-OGCM group). 4.5-5.9% of the pelvic and 31.8-33.8% of the vertebral fracture cases were treated surgically. Total healthcare costs were significantly higher after treatment in OGCM compared to non-OGCM hospitals for both fracture cohorts. For both fracture cohorts, a 95% probability of cost-effectiveness was not exceeded for a willingness-to-pay of up to €150,000 per life year or €150,000 per fracture-free life year gained.

CONCLUSION

We did not obtain distinct benefits of treatment in an OGCM hospital. Assigning cases to OGCM or non-OGCM group on hospital level might have underestimated the effect of OGCM as not all patients in the OGCM group have received OGCM.

Health-economic evaluation of orthogeriatric co-management for patients with forearm or humerus fractures: an analysis of insurance claims data from Germany

Orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) describes a collaboration of orthopedic surgeons and geriatricians for the treatment of fragility fractures in geriatric patients. While its cost-effectiveness for hip fractures has been widely investigated, research focusing on fractures of the upper extremities is lacking. Thus, we conducted a health economic evaluation of treatment in OGCM hospitals for forearm and humerus fractures.In a retrospective cohort study with nationwide health insurance claims data, we selected the first inpatient stay due to a forearm or humerus fracture in 2014-2018 either treated in hospitals that were able to offer OGCM (OGCM group) or not (non-OGCM group) and applied a 1-year follow-up. We included 31,557 cases with forearm (63.1% OGCM group) and 39,093 cases with humerus fractures (63.9% OGCM group) and balanced relevant covariates using entropy balancing. We investigated costs in different health sectors, length of stay, and cost-effectiveness regarding total cost per life year or fracture-free life year gained.In both fracture cohorts, initial hospital stay, inpatient stay, and total costs were higher in OGCM than in non-OGCM hospitals. For neither cohort nor effectiveness outcome, the probability that treatment in OGCM hospitals was cost-effective exceeded 95% for a willingness-to-pay of up to €150,000.We did not find distinct benefits of treatment in OGCM hospitals. Assigning cases to study groups on hospital-level and using life years and fracture-free life years, which might not adequately reflect the manifold ways these fractures affect the patients' health, as effectiveness outcomes, might have underestimated the effectiveness of treatment in OGCM hospitals.

Augmented osteosynthesis in fragility fracture

Due to poor bone quality and complexity, some fractures are difficult to treat, with high risk of failure. Moreover, general health is often poor in elderly patients with multiple comorbidity and poor compliance, necessitating perfect first-line management to avoid re-operation. The armamentarium comprises specific internal fixation implants and also complementary methods such as autologous, homologous or heterologous bone graft or bone substitutes with varying mechanical and biological characteristics. Associating these options is what is mean by "augmented fixation". The present review of augmented osteosynthesis addresses the following questions: What are the characteristics of fragility fractures? Fragility fracture is caused by low-energy trauma on bone with poor structural quality and low mineral density. Treatment aims to enable early mobilization and weight-bearing while avoiding mechanical failure of fixation. Prolonged bedrest, loss of mobility and surgical revision are aggravating and sometimes fatal factors in these fragile patients. What are the biological techniques of fixation augmentation in fragility fracture? Autologous or homologous bone graft are the most widely used biological augmentation techniques. They fill spaces and promote osteoconduction and consolidation. Some bone-like phosphocalcic structures are opening up promising lines of research. What are the non-biological techniques of fixation augmentation in fragility fracture? Hydroxyapatite, phosphocalcic cement and acrylic cement are the most widely used synthetic materials. Biological and mechanical effects are variable according to composition, requiring specific implementation. What are the mechanical techniques of fixation augmentation in fragility fracture? There is at present no consensus as to the augmentation techniques to be applied in fragility fracture. Cerclage or complementary plating, or external fixation associated to internal fixation are possibilities. However, the literature consists only of small series reporting surgical techniques specific to a given surgeon or team. When and how should osteosynthesis for fragility fracture be augmented? The choice of augmentation depends on fracture location, comminution, available material and local experience. The more severe the fracture, the more complex the fixation. The approach needs to be adapted to the preoperative planning and the associated mechanical means (plate, complementary cerclage) and prosthetic replacement should be considered in certain joint fractures or fractures close to load-bearing surfaces. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V; expert opinion.

Artificial Intelligence in Intensive Care Medicine: Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Interest in critical care–related artificial intelligence (AI) research is growing rapidly. However, the literature is still lacking in comprehensive bibliometric studies that measure and analyze scientific publications globally.

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the global research trends in AI in intensive care medicine based on publication outputs, citations, coauthorships between nations, and co-occurrences of author keywords.

Methods

A total of 3619 documents published until March 2022 were retrieved from the Scopus database. After selecting the document type as articles, the titles and abstracts were checked for eligibility. In the final bibliometric study using VOSviewer, 1198 papers were included. The growth rate of publications, preferred journals, leading research countries, international collaborations, and top institutions were computed.

Results

The number of publications increased steeply between 2018 and 2022, accounting for 72.53% (869/1198) of all the included papers. The United States and China contributed to approximately 55.17% (661/1198) of the total publications. Of the 15 most productive institutions, 9 were among the top 100 universities worldwide. Detecting clinical deterioration, monitoring, predicting disease progression, mortality, prognosis, and classifying disease phenotypes or subtypes were some of the research hot spots for AI in patients who are critically ill. Neural networks, decision support systems, machine learning, and deep learning were all commonly used AI technologies.

Conclusions

This study highlights popular areas in AI research aimed at improving health care in intensive care units, offers a comprehensive look at the research trend in AI application in the intensive care unit, and provides an insight into potential collaboration and prospects for future research. The 30 articles that received the most citations were listed in detail. For AI-based clinical research to be sufficiently convincing for routine critical care practice, collaborative research efforts are needed to increase the maturity and robustness of AI-driven models.

The top fifty most influential articles on hip fractures

PURPOSE

Hip fractures are one of the most common disabling fractures in elderly people and peri-operative management has advanced considerably over the past decades. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the change of scientific focus by creating a top 50 list of the most influential papers on this topic.

METHODS

The Clarivate Web of Science Search was used to identify the most cited articles. The used search phrase was [(hip OR pertrochanteric OR (femoral neck)) AND fracture AND (surgery OR treatment)]. The number of citations, citation density, study type, study design, published year, fracture type, country, evidence level and published journal were recorded.

RESULTS

The top 50 articles were published between 1973 and 2014 and cited between 88 and 496 times. The mean citation density increased noticeably after the year 2000, representing the knowledge gain of the last 20 years. The topics surgical treatment (n = 19), risk factor assessment (n = 19), perioperative hemodynamic management (n = 7), additional treatment (n = 4) and general reviews (n = 1) were covered. Twenty-five articles were published from institutions in Europe, 24 from institutions in North America and one from an institution in Asia.

CONCLUSION

While studies about surgical treatment options and risk factor assessment have been historically important, there was a rise of articles about additional treatment options for osteoporosis and the optimal postoperative care after the year 2005. The presented lists and map of citation classics give an overview of the most influential studies on hip fractures.

In-Hospital Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Fragility Fractures of the Lumbar Spine, Thoracic Spine, and Pelvic Ring: A Comparison of Data before and after Certification as a DGU® Geriatric Trauma Centre

Background and Objectives: The implementation of orthogeriatric co-management (OGCM) reflects the demand for interdisciplinary collaborations due to the increasing comorbidities of geriatric trauma patients. This study aimed to assess clinical in-hospital outcomes in lumbar spine, thoracic spine, and pelvic ring fragility fracture patients before and after the implementation of a Geriatric Trauma Centre (GTC) certified by the German Trauma Society (DGU^®). Materials and Methods: In this observational, retrospective cohort study, geriatric trauma patients (>70 years of age) were stratified into either a pre-GTC group (hospital admission between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013) or a post-GTC group (hospital admission between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018). Patients’ pre-injury medical complexity was measured by ASA class (American Society of Anaesthesiologists classification), the use of anticoagulant medication, and the ACCI (Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index). Outcome parameters were patients’ in-hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality rates, as well as new in-hospital findings and diagnoses. Further, the necessity of deviation from initial management plans due to complications was assessed using the Adapted Clavien–Dindo Scoring System in Trauma (ACDiT score of ≥1). Results: Patients in the post-GTC group (n = 111) were older (median age 82.0 years) compared to the pre-GTC group (n = 108, median age 80.0 years, p = 0.016). No differences were found in sex, body mass index, ASA class, or ACCI (all p > 0.05). Patients in the post-GTC group used vitamin K antagonists or direct oral anticoagulants more frequently (21.3% versus 10.8%). The incidence of non-surgical treatment and mortality was comparable between groups, while LOS tended to be shorter in the post-GTC group (7.0 days versus 9.0 days, p = 0.076). In the post-GTC group, the detection of urinary tract infections (UTI) increased (35.2% versus 16.2%, p = 0.001), and the delirium diagnoses tended to increase (13.0% versus 6.3%, p = 0.094), while an ACDiT score of ≥1 was comparable between groups (p = 0.169). Conclusions: In this study including lumbar spine, thoracic spine, and pelvic ring geriatric fragility fractures, patients in the post-GTC group were more medically complex. More UTIs and the tendency for increased delirium detection was observed in the post-GTC group, likely due to improved diagnostic testing. Nonetheless, the necessity of deviation from initial management plans (ACDiT score of ≥1) was comparable between groups, potentially a positive result of OGCM.