Comparing two different orthogeriatric models of care for hip fracture patients: an observational prospective cross-sectional study.


Journal

BMJ open quality
ISSN: 2399-6641
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open Qual
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101710381

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2023
Historique:
received: 01 02 2023
accepted: 09 08 2023
medline: 4 10 2023
pubmed: 3 10 2023
entrez: 2 10 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Patients with hip fractures are almost always operated with quite extensive surgery and are often frail with a high risk of complications, increased dependency, and death. Orthogeriatric interdisciplinary care has shown better results compared with orthopaedic care alone. The best way of delivering orthogeriatric care, however, is still largely unknown. It is believed that a high degree of integration and shared care is better than on-demand consultative services. We aimed to evaluate two different orthogeriatric models for patients with hip fracture. A prospective hip fracture quality database was used to evaluate two coexisting models of care from 2019 to 2021 in our hospital. An 'integrated care model' (ICM) was compared with a 'geriatric consult service' (GCS). 516 patients were available for analysis, 360 from ICM and 156 from GCS. Mean age was 84 years. There were 370 (72%) women. American Society of Anesthesiologists class and prefracture cognitive impairment was similar between the groups. There were more patients with femoral neck fractures in the ICM group, and more patients were living independently prefracture. A logistic regression adjusting for the variables above showed that more patients in the ICM group were given a nerve block preoperatively (OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.31 to 2.97); p<0.01), had their urinary catheter removed the first day after surgery (OR 1.9 (95% CI 1.27 to 2.89); p<0.01), were mobilised to standing or seated in a chair beside the bed the first day after surgery (OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.03 to 2.30); p=0.033) and more ICM patients were considered for treatment against osteoporosis (OR 8.58 (95% CI 4.03 to 18.28); p<0.001). There were no significant differences in time to surgery, length of stay, discharge destination or mortality. The ICM group performed equally good or better on all quality indicators than the GCS.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37783524
pii: bmjoq-2023-002302
doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002302
pmc: PMC10565326
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Observational Study Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: FF has received honorarium from UCB and Amgen and is president elect in Fragility Fracture Network. The others have no competing interests.

Références

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Nov 12;11:CD007125
pubmed: 34766330
Osteoporos Int. 2009 Oct;20(10):1633-50
pubmed: 19421703
Osteoporos Int. 2011 May;22(5):1277-88
pubmed: 21461721
Calcif Tissue Int. 2022 Jun;110(6):761-763
pubmed: 35092459
BMC Geriatr. 2016 Sep 02;16:158
pubmed: 27590604
Osteoporos Int. 2007 Sep;18(9):1279-85
pubmed: 17440675
Acta Orthop. 2020 Apr;91(2):139-145
pubmed: 31928088
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Apr;30(4):907-916
pubmed: 30715561
Bone Joint J. 2020 Dec;102-B(12):1675-1681
pubmed: 33249907
Int Orthop. 2019 Jun;43(6):1449-1454
pubmed: 29691612
Injury. 2018 Aug;49(8):1458-1460
pubmed: 29699731
Osteoporos Int. 2010 Dec;21(Suppl 4):S637-46
pubmed: 21058004
CMAJ. 2002 Jul 9;167(1):25-32
pubmed: 12137074
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017 Feb 1;18(2):192.e1-192.e11
pubmed: 28049616
Arch Osteoporos. 2021 Oct 8;16(1):152
pubmed: 34625842
Arch Intern Med. 2007 Oct 8;167(18):1971-6
pubmed: 17923597
J Orthop Trauma. 2014 Mar;28(3):e49-55
pubmed: 23912859
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Mar 16;152(6):380-90
pubmed: 20231569
Age Ageing. 2017 May 1;46(3):465-470
pubmed: 27974304
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2019 Apr;33(2):205-226
pubmed: 31547979
BMJ. 1988 Oct 29;297(6656):1083-6
pubmed: 3143436
Osteoporos Int. 2021 May;32(5):873-881
pubmed: 33201249
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018 Oct;19(10):840-845
pubmed: 29958818

Auteurs

Lene Bergendal Solberg (LB)

Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway l.b.solberg@gmail.com.

Elise Berg Vesterhus (EB)

Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Ingvild Hestnes (I)

Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Marc Vali Ahmed (MV)

Department of Geriatric Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Nina Ommundsen (N)

Department of Geriatric Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Marianne Westberg (M)

Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Frede Frihagen (F)

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Østfold Hospital Trust, Grålum, Norway.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH