R. Wakeman

The Impact of a National Clinician-led Audit Initiative on Care and Mortality after Hip Fracture in England: An External Evaluation using Time Trends in Non-audit Data

Background:Hip fracture is the most common serious injury of older people. The UK National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) was launched in 2007 as a national collaborative, clinician-led audit initiative to improve the quality of hip fracture care, but has not yet been externally evaluated. Methods:We used routinely collected data on 471,590 older people (aged 60 years and older) admitted with a hip fracture to National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England between 2003 and 2011. The main variables of interest were the use of early surgery (on day of admission, or day after) and mortality at 30 days from admission. We compared time trends in the periods 2003–2007 and 2007–2011 (before and after the launch of the NHFD), using Poisson regression models to adjust for demographic changes. Findings:The number of hospitals participating in the NHFD increased from 11 in 2007 to 175 in 2011. From 2007 to 2011, the rate of early surgery increased from 54.5% to 71.3%, whereas the rate had remained stable over the period 2003–2007. Thirty-day mortality fell from 10.9% to 8.5%, compared with a small reduction from 11.5% to 10.9% previously. The annual relative reduction in adjusted 30-day mortality was 1.8% per year in the period 2003–2007, compared with 7.6% per year over 2007–2011 (P<0.001 for the difference). Interpretation:The launch of a national clinician-led audit initiative was associated with substantial improvements in care and survival of older people with hip fracture in England.

Predicting 30-day mortality after hip fracture surgery: Evaluation of the National Hip Fracture Database case-mix adjustment model

Objectives The National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) publishes hospital-level risk-adjusted mortality rates following hip fracture surgery in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The performance of the risk model used by the NHFD was compared with the widely-used Nottingham Hip Fracture Score. Methods Data from 94 hospitals on patients aged 60 to 110 who had hip fracture surgery between May 2013 and July 2013 were analysed. Data were linked to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death register to calculate the 30-day mortality rate. Risk of death was predicted for each patient using the NHFD and Nottingham models in a development dataset using logistic regression to define the models’ coefficients. This was followed by testing the performance of these refined models in a second validation dataset. Results The 30-day mortality rate was 5.36% in the validation dataset (n = 3861), slightly lower than the 6.40% in the development dataset (n = 4044). The NHFD and Nottingham models showed a slightly lower discrimination in the validation dataset compared with the development dataset, but both still displayed moderate discriminative power (c-statistic for NHFD = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 0.74; Nottingham model = 0.70, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.75). Both models defined similar ranges of predicted mortality risk (1% to 18%) in assessment of calibration. Conclusions Both models have limitations in predicting mortality for individual patients after hip fracture surgery, but the NHFD risk adjustment model performed as well as the widely-used Nottingham prognostic tool and is therefore a reasonable alternative for risk adjustment in the United Kingdom hip fracture population. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2017;6:550–556

Understanding mortality rates after hip fracture repair using ASA physical status in the National Hip Fracture Database

Hip fracture is the most common reason for older patients to need emergency anaesthesia and surgery. Up to one‐third of patients die in the year after hip fracture, but this view of outcome may encourage therapeutic nihilism in peri‐operative decisions and discussions. We used a multicentre national dataset to examine relative and absolute mortality rates for patients presenting with hip fracture, stratified by ASA physical status. We analysed ASA physical status, dates of surgery, death and hospital discharge for 59,369 out of 64,864 patients in the 2015 National Hip Fracture Database; 3914 (6.6%) of whom died in hospital. Rates of death in hospital were 1.8% in ASA 1–2 patients compared with 16.5% in ASA 4 patients. Survival rates for ASA 4 patients on each of the first three postoperative days were: 98.8%, 99.1% and 99.1% (compared with figures of > 99.9% in ASA 1–2 patients over these days). Survival on postoperative day 6 was 99.4% for ASA 4 patients. Nearly half (48.6%) of the 1427 patients who did not have surgery died in hospital. Although technically sound, a focus on cumulative and relative risk of mortality may frame discussions in an unduly negative fashion, discouraging surgeons and anaesthetists from offering an operation, and deterring patients and their loved ones from agreeing to it. A more optimistic and pragmatic explanation that over 98% of ASA 4 patients survive both the day of surgery and the day after it, may be more appropriate.

Is the incidence of hip fracture increasing among older men in England

The prevention of hip fracture has been a long-term goal for healthcare in England.1 Over the past decade, there have been numerous initiatives aimed at reducing the risk of fracture among frail older people.2 We examined trends in the incidence of hip fracture over the last decade and noticed a difference between women and men. While rates have decreased among women, they have increased among men. We calculated age-specific incidence separately for women and men for each calendar year from 2003 to 2013. We combined two datasets: (1) Hospital Episode Statistics were used to identify the number of people admitted to hospital with …