After integrated orthogeriatric treatment, a significant decrease was seen in the 1-year mortality rate in the frail elderly patients with a hip fracture compared to the historical control patients who were treated with standard care. The most important risk factors for 1-year mortality were male gender, increasing age, malnutrition, physical limitations, increasing BI, and medical conditions. Awareness of risk factors that affect the 1-year mortality can be useful in optimizing care and outcomes. Orthogeriatric treatment should be standard for elderly patients with hip fractures due to the multidimensional needs of these patients.
After integrated orthogeriatric treatment, a complicated course was seen in 49.6% of the patients with a hip fracture. The in-hospital mortality rate was 3.8%. Important risk factors for a complicated course were increasing age, poor medical condition and delirium risk VMS Frailty score. Awareness of risk factors that affect the course during admission can be useful in optimizing care and outcomes. In the search for possible areas for improvement in care, targeted preventive measures to mitigate delirium, and healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), such as CAUTIs and pneumonia are important.
Quality indicators are used to measure quality of care and enable benchmarking. An overview of all existing hip fracture quality indicators is lacking. The primary aim was to identify quality indicators for hip fracture care reported in literature, hip fracture audits, and guidelines. The secondary aim was to compose a set of methodologically sound quality indicators for the evaluation of hip fracture care in clinical practice. A literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines and an internet search were performed to identify hip fracture quality indicators. The indicators were subdivided into process, structure, and outcome indicators. The methodological quality of the indicators was judged using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. For structure and process indicators, the construct validity was assessed. Sixteen publications, nine audits and five guidelines were included. In total, 97 unique quality indicators were found: 9 structure, 63 process, and 25 outcome indicators. Since detailed methodological information about the indicators was lacking, the AIRE instrument could not be applied. Seven indicators correlated with an outcome measure. A set of nine quality indicators was extracted from the literature, audits, and guidelines. Many quality indicators are described and used. Not all of them correlate with outcomes of care and have been assessed methodologically. As methodological evidence is lacking, we recommend the extracted set of nine indicators to be used as the starting point for further clinical research. Future research should focus on assessing the clinimetric properties of the existing quality indicators.
Objective: Since April 1, 2008, patients aged 65 years presenting with a hip fracture at Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo (ZGT-A), The Netherlands, have been admitted to the geriatric fracture center (GFC) and treated according to the multidisciplinary treatment approach. The objective of this study was to evaluate how implementation of the treatment approach has influenced the quality of care given to older patients with hip fracture. Design: Prospective cohort study with historical control group. The use of the multidisciplinary treatment approach led to a significant reduction in the number of readmissions within 30 days after discharge. It appears to be associated with improved short-term treatment outcomes for older patients with a hip fracture.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.