Implantación de una Unidad de Ortogeriatría de Agudos en un hospital de segundo nivel / Opening of an Acute Orthogeriatric Unit in a general hospital

Introducción. Los pacientes con fractura de cadera (FC), precisan por sus características una asistencia específica. Una de las que más beneficios han demostrado es la Unidad Ortogeriátrica de Agudos (UOG). Objetivos. Evaluar las principales variables, de los pacientes con FC atendidos en una UOG de nueva creación y compararlas con el modelo interconsultor previo (IC). Material y métodos. Estudio prospectivo observacional con control retrospectivo. Se distribuyen en 2 grupos, 169 pacientes. En el grupo IC, los pacientes ingresan en planta convencional de Traumatología y en el grupo UOG, se realiza una valoración geriátrica precoz, son atendidos a diario por el traumatólogo, la enfermera y el geriatra simultáneamente, y semanalmente en una reunión con el resto de profesionales se planifican los tiempos de cirugía, de carga, de alta y el destino. Resultados. Se incluyen 71 pacientes en el grupo de IC y 96 en el grupo de UOG. Las características previas son homogéneas, salvo una comorbilidad discretamente superior en el grupo de UOG. Los pacientes de UOG se intervinieron antes (3,82±2,08 vs 4,61±2,5 días; p<0,32) y la estancia hospitalaria global se redujo un 28% (11,84±4,04 vs 16,46±8,4 días; p<0,001). La eficiencia funcional (índice de Barthel al alta-índice de Barthel al ingreso/estancia global-estancia precirugía) fue superior en el grupo de UOG (1,56±0,7 vs 2,61±1,1; p<0,05). No hubo diferencias en la situación funcional, la mortalidad o la ubicación al alta. Conclusiones. La UOG es un nivel asistencial que aporta una atención más eficaz de los pacientes con FC en hospitales de segundo nivel(AU)

Background. Patients with hip fracture (HF), due to their characteristics, require a specific support. The Acute Orthogeriatric Unit (OGU) has been shown to be one of the most beneficial. Objective. To evaluate the main variables of HF patients treated at an OGU and compare them with the previous referral model (RC). Material and methods. A prospective observational study with retrospective control was conducted on 169 patients, split into two groups. In the RC group, patients were admitted to conventional trauma ward. In the OGU group, an early geriatric assessment was performed, and patients were simultaneously attended daily by the orthopaedic surgeon, nurse and geriatrician, and the surgery times, work load, discharge and destination, were planned in a weekly meeting with the rest of professionals. Results. A total of 71 patients were included in the RC group and 96 in the OGU group. The preoperative characteristics were similar, except for a slightly higher comorbidity in the OGU group. The OGU patients were operated on earlier (3.82±2.08 vs 4.61±2.5 days; P<.32), and overall hospital stay was reduced by 28% (11.84±4.04 vs 16.46±8.4 days; P<.001). The functional efficiency (Barthel Index at discharge-Barthel Index at admission/overall stay - stay before surgery) was higher in the OGU group (1.56±0.7 vs 2.61±1.1; P<.05). There were no differences in functional status, mortality or discharge location. Conclusions. The OGU is a level of care that provides effective medical care in HF patients in general hospitals(AU)

[Opening of an Acute Orthogeriatric Unit in a general hospital]. / Implantación de una Unidad de Ortogeriatría de Agudos en un hospital de segundo nivel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hip fracture (HF), due to their characteristics, require a specific support. The Acute Orthogeriatric Unit (OGU) has been shown to be one of the most beneficial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the main variables of HF patients treated at an OGU and compare them with the previous referral model (RC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective observational study with retrospective control was conducted on 169 patients, split into two groups. In the RC group, patients were admitted to conventional trauma ward. In the OGU group, an early geriatric assessment was performed, and patients were simultaneously attended daily by the orthopaedic surgeon, nurse and geriatrician, and the surgery times, work load, discharge and destination, were planned in a weekly meeting with the rest of professionals. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were included in the RC group and 96 in the OGU group. The preoperative characteristics were similar, except for a slightly higher comorbidity in the OGU group. The OGU patients were operated on earlier (3.82±2.08 vs 4.61±2.5 days; P<.32), and overall hospital stay was reduced by 28% (11.84±4.04 vs 16.46±8.4 days; P<.001). The functional efficiency (Barthel Index at discharge-Barthel Index at admission/overall stay - stay before surgery) was higher in the OGU group (1.56±0.7 vs 2.61±1.1; P<.05). There were no differences in functional status, mortality or discharge location. CONCLUSIONS: The OGU is a level of care that provides effective medical care in HF patients in general hospitals.

Timing of DVT prophylaxis and risk of postoperative knee prosthesis infection.

This multicenter prospective study was performed to determine risk factors for knee prosthesis infection and the effect of timing doses of prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) related to time of surgery on the risk of knee prosthesis infection. A total of 5496 consecutive patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty from 2005 to 2006 in 13 orthopedic centers were prospectively followed up for 6 months, and the incidence of knee prosthesis infection was recorded. A case control study was nested in the cohort. Case patients were matched to uninfected (control) patients, and the timing of perioperative LMWH was recorded as the main risk factor. Fifty patients developed postoperative knee prosthesis infection during the follow-up period, yielding an incidence of prosthesis infection of 0.91% (95% CI, 0.68%-1.20%). Forty-four patients were matched to 106 controls. Case patients received the first LMWH dose ±12 hours from the start of surgery more frequently than their control counterparts (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.73-3.0). After adjusting by main risk factors, no statistical association was found between close perioperative timing of LMWH and risk of prosthesis infection. Diabetes mellitus (adjusted odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.2-8.8) and wound hematoma (adjusted odds ratio, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.1-16.5) were found to be independent risk factors for prosthesis infection.

[Infections in the surgical management of pelvic ring fractures]. / Infecciones en el manejo quirúrgico de las fracturas del anillo pélvico.

BACKGROUND: Infections that occur after the surgical management of pelvic fractures may involve potentially devastating complications. The broader approaches involving soft tissue dissection and a long operative time may increase the infection rate when compared with more conservative approaches. This incidence may be reduced with a better understanding of the approaches, lymph node sparing and antibiotic use. The purpose of this study is to assess the incidence and severity of local infections in a series of adult patients with pelvic ring lesions treated surgically. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational descriptive study. A total of 49 patients operated on by a single surgeon from 2004 to 2008 were included. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (90%) had no signs of infection during the treatment period. In the remaining 5 cases (10%), 5 episodes of infection were documented. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of a local postoperative infection warrants an aggressive and urgent assessment of the patient. The devitalized tissue should be removed and empiric antibiotic therapy should be instituted after taking culture samples. A deep infection rate after pelvic fixation ranging from 0 to 10% has been published. The prevalence is higher among the surgical teams with less expertise. The incidence rate in our review was similar to the one reported in the literature.