Xavier L. Griffin

Outcome assessment after hip fracture: is EQ-5D the answer?

Objectives To study the measurement properties of a joint specific patient reported outcome measure, a measure of capability and a general health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tool in a large cohort of patients with a hip fracture. Methods Responsiveness and associations between the Oxford Hip Score (a hip specific measure: OHS), ICEpop CAPability (a measure of capability in older people: ICECAP-O) and EuroQol EQ-5D (general health-related quality of life measure: EQ-5D) were assessed using data available from two large prospective studies. The three outcome measures were assessed concurrently at a number of fixed follow-up time-points in a consecutive sequence of patients, allowing direct assessment of change from baseline, inter-measure associations and validity using a range of statistical methods. Results ICECAP-O was not responsive to change. EQ-5D was responsive to change from baseline, with an estimated standardised effect size for the two datasets of 0.676 and 0.644 at six weeks and four weeks respectively; this was almost as responsive to change as OHS (1.14 at four weeks). EQ-5D correlated strongly with OHS; Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.74, 0.77 and 0.70 at baseline, four weeks and four months. EQ-5D is a moderately good predictor of death at 12 months following hip fracture. Furthermore, EQ-5D reported by proxies (relatives and carers) behaves similarly to self-reported scores. Conclusions Our findings suggest that a general HRQOL tool such as EQ-5D could be used to measure outcome for patients recovering from hip fracture, including those with cognitive impairment. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:69–75.

Recovery of health-related quality of life in a United Kingdom hip fracture population: the Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation - a prospective cohort study

Hip fracture is a global public health problem. The National Hip Fracture Database provides a framework for service evaluation in this group of patients in the United Kingdom, but does not collect patient-reported outcome data and is unable to provide meaningful data about the recovery of quality of life. We report one-year patient-reported outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients treated at a single major trauma centre in the United Kingdom who sustained a hip fracture between January 2012 and March 2014. There was an initial marked decline in quality of life from baseline measured using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D). It was followed by a significant improvement to 120 days for all patients. Although their quality of life improved during the year after the fracture, it was still significantly lower than before injury irrespective of age group or cognitive impairment (mean reduction EQ-5D 0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.26). There was strong evidence that quality of life was lower for patients with cognitive impairment. There was a mean reduction in EQ-5D of 0.28 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.35) in patients < 80 years of age. This difference was consistent (and fixed) throughout follow-up. Quality of life does not improve significantly during recovery from hip fracture in patients over 80 years of age (p = 0.928). Secondary measures of function showed similar trends. Hip fracture marks a step down in the quality of life of a patient: it accounts for approximately 0.22 disability adjusted life years in the first year after fracture. This is equivalent to serious neurological conditions for which extensive funding for research and treatment is made available.

The role of low intensity pulsed ultrasound therapy in the management of acute fractures: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to review the evidence regarding the use of low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) in the management of acute long bone fractures. METHODS Systematic review of Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases. Further published studies were retrieved by hand searching bibliographies of relevant articles. Retrieved studies were limited to English-language studies published since 1956. Retrieved studies were excluded from review using the following criteria: case reports, exclusively pathologic fractures, treatment of therapeutic osteotomies and arthrodesis, initiation of ultrasound therapy after the first month following injury, no reporting of assessment of time to fracture healing, cellular studies, and nonclinical articles. Studies were reviewed independently by two reviewers using the CONSORT score. No statistical analysis was performed as the data from the studies were not suitable for pooled analysis. RESULTS Seven randomized controlled trials and two meta-analyses were retrieved using the search strategy. CONCLUSION The literature supports the use of LIPUS in the treatment of acute fractures treated with plaster immobilization.

Does cementing the femoral component increase the risk of peri-operative mortality for patients having replacement surgery for a fracture of the neck of femur? Data from the National Hip Fracture Database.

Concerns have been reported to the United Kingdom National Patient Safety Agency, warning that cementing the femoral component during hip replacement surgery for fracture of the proximal femur may increase peri-operative mortality. The National Hip Fracture Database collects demographic and outcome data about patients with a fracture of the proximal femur from over 100 participating hospitals in the United Kingdom. We conducted a mixed effects logistic regression analysis of this dataset to determine whether peri-operative mortality was increased in patients who had undergone either hemiarthroplasty or total hip replacement using a cemented femoral component. A total of 16,496 patients from 129 hospitals were included in the analysis, which showed a small but significant adjusted survival benefit associated with cementing (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.96). Other statistically significant variables in predicting death at discharge, listed in order of magnitude of effect, were gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, age, walking accompanied outdoors and arthroplasty. Interaction terms between cementing and these other variables were sequentially added to, but did not improve, the model. This study has not shown an increase in peri-operative mortality as a result of cementing the femoral component in patients requiring hip replacement following fracture of the proximal femur.

Developing a core outcome set for hip fracture trials

The lack of a consensus for core health outcomes that should be reported in clinical research has hampered study design and evidence synthesis. We report a United Kingdom consensus for a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of patients with a hip fracture. We adopted a modified nominal group technique to derive consensus on 1) which outcome domains should be measured, and 2) methods of assessment. Participants reflected a diversity of perspectives and experience. They received an evidence synthesis and postal questionnaire in advance of the consensus meeting, and ranked the importance of candidate domains and the relevance and suitability of short-listed measures. During the meeting, pre-meeting source data and questionnaire responses were summarised, followed by facilitated discussion and a final plenary session. A COS was determined using a closed voting system: a 70% consensus was required. Consensus supported a five-domain COS: mortality, pain, activities of daily living, mobility, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). Single-item measures of mortality and mobility (indoor/outdoor walking status) and a generic multi-item measure of HRQL - the EuroQoL EQ-5D - were recommended. These measures should be included as a minimum in all hip fracture trials. Other outcome measures should be added depending on the particular interventions being studied. Cite this article:

Evaluating recovery following hip fracture: a qualitative interview study of what is important to patients

Objective To explore what patients consider important when evaluating their recovery from hip fracture and to consider how these priorities could be used in the evaluation of the quality of hip fracture services. Design Semistructured interviews exploring the experience of recovery from hip fracture at two time points—4 weeks and 4 months postoperative hip fixation. Two approaches to analysis: thematic analysis of data specifically related to recovery from hip fracture; summarising the participants experience overall. Participants 31 participants were recruited, of whom 20 were women and 12 were cognitively impaired. Mean age was 81.5 years. Interviews were provided by 19 patients, 14 carers and 8 patient/carer dyad; 10 participants were interviewed twice. Setting Single major trauma centre in the West Midlands of the UK. Results Stable mobility (without falls or fear of falls) for valued activities was considered most important by participants who had some prefracture mobility and were able to articulate what they valued during recovery. Mobility was important for managing personal care, for day-to-day activities such as shopping and gardening, and for maintenance of mental well-being. Some participants used assistive mobility devices or adapted to their limitations. Others maintained their previous limited function through increased care provision. Many participants were unable to articulate what they valued as hip fracture was perceived as part of their decline with age. The fracture and problems from other health conditions were an inseparable part of one health experience. Conclusions Prefracture mobility, adaptations to reduced mobility before or after fracture, and whether or not patients perceive themselves to be declining with age influence what patients consider important during recovery from hip fracture. No single patient-reported outcome measure could evaluate quality of care for all patients following hip fracture. General health-related quality of life tools may provide useful information within clinical trials.

The Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation - an abridged protocol for the WHiTE Study: A multiple embedded randomised controlled trial cohort study.

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. The National Hip Fracture Audit currently provides a framework for service evaluation. This evaluation is based upon the assessment of process rather than assessment of patient-centred outcome and therefore it fails to provide meaningful data regarding the clinical effectiveness of treatments. This study aims to capture data from the cohort of patients who present with a fracture of the proximal femur at a single United Kingdom Major Trauma Centre. Patient-centred outcomes will be recorded and provide a baseline cohort within which to test the clinical effectiveness of experimental interventions.

Hip fracture surgery: improving the quality of the evidence base

Hip fracture is a common injury associated with high mortality, long-term disability and huge socio-economic burden. Yet there has been relatively little research into best treatment, and evidence that has been generated has often been criticised for its poor quality. Here, we discuss the advances made towards overcoming these criticisms and the future directions for hip fracture research: how co-ordinating existing national infrastructures and use of now established clinical research networks will likely go some way towards overcoming the practical and financial challenges of conducting large trials. We highlight the importance of large collaborative pragmatic trials to inform decision/policy makers and the progress made towards reaching a consensus on a core outcome set to facilitate data pooling for evidence synthesis and meta-analysis. These advances and future directions are a priority in order to establish the high-quality evidence base required for this important group of patients.

the Targon femoral neck hip screw versus cannulated screws for internal fixation of intracapsular fractures of the hip: a randomised controlled trial.

We compared a new fixation system, the Targon Femoral Neck (TFN) hip screw, with the current standard treatment of cannulated screw fixation. This was a single-centre, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 years and over with either a displaced or undisplaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were eligible. The primary outcome was the risk of revision surgery within one year of fixation. A total of 174 participants were included in the trial. The absolute reduction in risk of revision was of 4.7% (95% CI 14.2 to 22.5) in favour of the TFN hip screw (chi-squared test, p = 0.741), which was less than the pre-specified level of minimum clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures. We found no evidence of a clinical difference in the risk of revision surgery between the TFN hip screw and cannulated screw fixation for patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip.

Inequalities in use of total hip arthroplasty for hip fracture: population based study

Objectives To determine whether the use of total hip arthroplasty (THA) among individuals with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck is based on national guidelines or if there are systematic inequalities. Design Observational cohort study using the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD). Setting All hospitals that treat adults with hip fractures in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Participants Patients within the national database (all aged ≥60) who received operative treatment for a non-pathological displaced intracapsular hip fracture from 1 July 2011 to 31 April 2015. Main outcome measures Provision of THA to patients considered eligible under criteria published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Results 114 119 patients with hip fracture were included, 11 683 (10.2%) of whom underwent THA. Of those who satisfied the NICE criteria, 32% (6780)received a THA. Of patients who underwent THA, 42% (4903) did not satisfy the NICE criteria. A recursive partitioning algorithm found that the NICE eligibility criteria did not optimally explain which patients underwent THA. A model with superior explanatory power drew distinctions that are not supported by NICE, which were an age cut off at 76 and a different ambulation cut off. Among patients who satisfied the NICE eligibility, the use of THA was less likely with higher age (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 0.88), worsening abbreviated mental test scores (0.49 (0.41 to 0.58) for normal cognition v borderline cognitive impairment)), worsening American Society of Anesthesiologists score (0.74, 0.66 to 0.84), male sex (0.85, 0.77 to 0.93), worsening ambulatory status (0.32, 0.28 to 0.35 for walking with a stick v independent ambulation), and fifths of worsening socioeconomic area deprivation (0.76 (0.66 to 0.88) for least v most deprived fifth). Patients receiving treatment during the working week were more likely to receive THA than at the weekend (0.90, 0.83 to 0.98). Conclusions There are wide disparities in the use of THA among individuals with hip fractures, and compliance with NICE guidance is poor. Patients with higher levels of socioeconomic deprivation and those who require surgery at the weekend were less likely to receive THA. Inconsistent compliance with NICE recommendations means that the optimal treatment for older adults with hip fractures can depend on where and when they present to hospital.