Development and Internal Validation of a Prediction Model for In-Hospital Mortality in Geriatric Patients With a Hip Fracture.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model for in-hospital mortality in patients with hip fracture 85 years of age or older undergoing surgery. DESIGN: A multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six Dutch trauma centers, level 2 and 3. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with hip fracture 85 years of age or older undergoing surgery. INTERVENTION: Hip fracture surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: In-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The development cohort consisted of 1014 patients. In-hospital mortality was 4%. Age, male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and hemoglobin levels at presentation were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. The bootstrap adjusted performance showed good discrimination with a c-statistic of 0.77. CONCLUSION: Age, male sex, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and lower hemoglobin levels at presentation are robust independent predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with geriatric hip fracture and were incorporated in a simple prediction model with good accuracy and no lack of fit. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Use of Calscan for improving osteoporosis care in the older patient admitted with hip fracture.

To determine whether bone mineral density measurement using the Calscan successfully predicts the actual bone mineral density, as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. We included all patients≥65 years with a hip fracture screened on osteoporosis by both dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and the Calscan during the period April 2008 to April 2011. The bone mineral density was expressed as a T-score. For the Calscan T-score, thresholds were defined such that patients with and without osteoporosis could be identified with 90% certainty. Patients with a Calscan T-score above the upper threshold were considered to be non-osteoporotic and those with a Calscan T-score below the lower threshold considered osteoporotic. Patients whose Calscan T-score lay between the two thresholds could only be classified by means of DXA. The correlation between dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and the Calscan was 0.61. The Calscan identified approximately 25% of patients as osteoporotic and 25% as non-osteoporotic. The upper threshold was found to be -1.8SD and the lower threshold -3.5SD. Osteoporosis screening by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry had been carried out in 44% of patients. This percentage could theoretically rise to >70% if the Calscan is implemented in osteoporosis screening, while costs of such screening appear to be lower, as long as a sufficient number of patients are screened.

The value of laboratory tests in diagnosing secondary osteoporosis at a fracture and osteoporosis outpatient clinic.

BACKGROUND: As more and more patients meeting the criteria for osteoporosis are referred to a fracture and osteoporosis outpatient clinic (FO clinic), the laboratory costs to screen for secondary osteoporosis also increases. This study was conducted to determine the value of screening on underlying diseases at an FO clinic by obtaining a standard set of laboratory tests. METHODS: We included all 541 patients ≥50 years with a fracture referred to our FO clinic, during the period January 2005 to January 2007. The bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry and expressed as a T score. A standard set of laboratory tests was obtained to screen on underlying diseases. RESULTS: Laboratory results were as often abnormal in patients with a normal BMD compared to patients with a low BMD. Underlying diseases were infrequently diagnosed. However, the prevalence of secondary osteoporosis in men was quite high, up to 18.2%. The costs to diagnose 1 patient with an underlying disease did vary between €92 and €972 depending on the group of patients described. CONCLUSION: Screening all patients, referred to an FO clinic, for underlying diseases by obtaining a standard set of laboratory tests is probably not useful since laboratory tests are as often abnormal in patients with a normal BMD compared to patients with a low BMD. Moreover, the prevalence of secondary osteoporosis is low, while laboratory costs are substantial.