Risk scoring models for patients with proximal femur fractures: Qualitative systematic review assessing 30-day mortality and ease of use.

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are a common orthopaedic injury affecting a particularly frail and vulnerable patient cohort. They are at risk of many complications, including prolonged length of stay and mortality. Efforts to identify those at high risk may be beneficial. Over 25 risk prediction models are published for patients with hip fractures. AIM: The primary aim of this study was to assess the performance of predictor scores in predicting 30-day mortality. The secondary aim was to assess the ease of use of these systems. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review was performed. A search was conducted on online databases, including PubMed, CINAHL, Clinical Trials.gov, Cochrane, DARE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science.. The terms fragility hip fractures and risk prediction models were utilised while performing the search. These were then expanded using Boolean operators and similar terms. Search results were imported to Covidence. Primary observational studies using one or more hip fracture mortality prediction models and 30-day mortality as an outcome were included. Systematic reviews and studies on specific patient groups defined other medical conditions (e.g. COVID positive or dialysis patients) were excluded. RESULTS: 3,101 studies were screened following duplicate removal. 34 papers were included in the review, in which 23 scoring systems were reported. Six of these were pre-operative and reported in multiple studies. Most demonstrated appropriate fit and fair discrimination. Five of the six pre-operative scoring systems examined, displayed appropriate ease of use, allowing risk calculation at the time of admission. CONCLUSION: Nottingham Hip Fracture Score remains the most extensive reported scoring system and performs fair overall with AUROCs of 0.64-0.80 and good fit in calibration across all studies. However, new systems utilise many similar predictors. There is a need for the standardisation of publications on scoring systems to allow further systematic review and meta-analyses.

Early mobilisation following fragility hip fracture surgery: current trends and association with discharge outcomes in a local tertiary hospital.

Introduction: Postoperative day 1 (POD 1) mobilisation is a key clinical indicator for the fragility hip fracture surgery population. This study aimed to evaluate the current trends of POD 1 mobilisation at our institution and to review the relationships between early mobilisation and outcomes of early functional recovery, length of stay (LOS) and discharge destination. Methods: In this preliminary observational study, data pertaining to demographics, premorbid function, health status, injury and surgical factors, POD 1 mobilisation status and clinical outcomes of interest were retrieved from eligible patients. Patients who attained POD 1 ambulation formed the early ambulation (EA) group, while the remaining patients formed the delayed ambulation (DA) group. Data were analysed for any significant difference between the groups. Results: One hundred and fifteen patients were included in the analysis. The rate of patients achieving at least sitting out of bed on POD 1 was 80.0% (n=92), which was comparable to the data available from international hip fracture audit databases. There were 55 (47.8%) patients in the EA group and 60 (52.5%) patients in the DA group. The EA group was approximately nine times more likely to achieve independence in ambulation at discharge compared to the DA group (adjusted odds ratio 9.20, 95% confidence interval 1.50-56.45; P = 0.016). There were observed trends of shorter LOS and more proportion of home discharge in the EA group compared to the DA group (P > 0.05). Conclusion: This is the first local study to offer benchmark of the POD 1 mobilisation status for this population. Patients who attained POD 1 ambulation had better early functional recovery.

The Use of Tranexamic Acid in Hip Fracture Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effect of intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA) on blood transfusion requirements in adult patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Secondary aim was to evaluate the safety by assessing thromboembolic events. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, PubMed, and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 2010. STUDY SELECTION: Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials that analyzed the use of intravenous TXA on blood transfusion requirement in hip fracture surgery. DATA EXTRACTION: Titles and abstracts were screened and assessed for eligibility by 2 independent reviewers. Quality and risk of bias was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis with random and fixed effect models was performed. Risk ratio (RR) was calculated for dichotomous outcomes and estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, the risk difference (RD) was estimated with a 95% CI. RESULTS: A total of 13 trials involving 1194 patients were included. Pooled results showed that patients in the TXA group had significantly lower transfusion requirements (RR 0.50, 95%CI 0.30-0.84, P = 0.009). Similar findings were observed in the subcohort of patients with transfusion threshold of Hb < 8g/dL, (RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.31-0.56, P < 0.0001). This risk reduction was not observed in the subcohort of patients with transfusion threshold of Hb 8.1-10g/dL who received TXA (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.51-1.18, P = 0.23) and no statistically significant differences were found for total thromboembolic events (RR 0.01, 95%CI -0.02-0.04, P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that intravenous TXA reduced blood transfusion rates and did not increase the risk of thromboembolic events. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Outcomes of orthopaedic trauma patients undergoing surgery during the peak period of COVID-19 infection at a UK major trauma centre.

BACKGROUND: To review the clinical outcomes of all patients undergoing emergency orthopaedic trauma surgery at a UK major trauma centre during the first 6 weeks of the COVID-19 related lockdown. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent emergency orthopaedic trauma surgery at a single urban major trauma centre over the first six-week period of national lockdown. Demographics, co-morbidities, injuries, injury severity scores, surgery, COVID-19 status, complications and mortalities were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included for review who underwent multiple procedures. Significant co-morbidity was present in 72%. The overall COVID-19 infection rate of the study population at any time was 22%. Sub-group analysis indicated 13% had active COVID-19 at the time of surgery. Only 4% of patients developed COVID-19 post surgery with no mortalities in this sub-group. The overall mortality rate was 4%. The overall complication rate was 14%. However mortality and complications rates were higher if the patients had active COVID-19 at surgery, if they were over 70 years and had sustained life-threatening injuries. CONCLUSION: The overall survival rate for patients undergoing emergency orthopaedic trauma surgery during the COVID-19 peak was 96%. The rate of any complication was more significant in those presenting with active COVID-19 infections who had sustained potentially life threatening injuries and were over 70 years of age. Conversely those without active COVID-19 infection and who lacked significant co-morbidities experienced a lower complication and mortality rate.

Implementation of a mobile app for trauma education: results from a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: In an era of shared decision making, patient expectations for education have increased. Ideal resources would offer accurate information, digital delivery and interaction. Mobile applications have potential to fulfill these requirements. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate adoption of a patient education application (app: http://bit.ly/traumaapp) at multiple sites with disparate locations and varied populations. METHODS: A trauma patient education application was developed at one trauma center and subsequently released at three new trauma centers. The app contains information regarding treatment and recovery and was customized with provider information for each institution. Each center was provided with promotional materials, and each had strategies to inform providers and patients about the app. Data regarding utilization was collected. Patients were surveyed about usage and recommendations. RESULTS: Over the 16-month study period, the app was downloaded 844 times (70%) in the metropolitan regions of the study centers. The three new centers had 380, 89 and 31 downloads, while the original center had 93 downloads. 36% of sessions were greater than 2 min, while 41% were less than a few seconds. The percentage of those surveyed who used the app ranged from 14.3% to 44.0% for a weighted average of 36.8% of those having used the app. The mean patient willingness to recommend the app was 3.3 on a 5-point Likert scale. However, the distribution was bimodal: 60% of patients rated the app 4 or 5, while 32% rated it 1 or 2. DISCUSSION: The adoption of a trauma patient education app was successful at four centers with disparate patient populations. The majority of patients were likely to recommend the app. Variations in implementation strategies resulted in different rates of download. Integration of the app into patient education by providers is associated with more downloads. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III care management.