No abstract

Delayed discharges post hip fracture have been shown to expose patients to increased perioperative morbidity and mortality rates, as well as reduced rehabilitation potential and less chance of returning home on discharge. This has significant cost implications for the health service and justifies the introduction of hospital bypass protocols for patients with hip fractures.

As the incidence of fragility fractures continues to rise, healthcare professionals will encounter patients with fractures in a variety of clinical settings such as falls clinics, intermediate care services and acute medical wards. Older people with fragility fractures are a diverse group, and their care needs are complex. Although some have comparatively few health problems, many have a series of interconnected illnesses and psychological and social problems requiring a range of therapeutic interventions. The primary focus of care is to meet the needs of the older person following skeletal trauma throughout their care pathway and ensure that they receive the same high standard of specialist care within orthopaedic services as they would within a setting specialising in the care of older people. The central philosophy should be holistic care using a person-centred approach that brings the various aspects of specialist care together.'Geriatric syndrome' is a term often used to refer to common health problems in older adults that do not fit into distinct organ-specific disease categories and that have multifactorial causes; this includes problems such as frailty, cognitive impairment, delirium, incontinence, malnutrition, falls, gait disorders, pressure ulcers, sleep disorders, sensory deficits, fatigue and dizziness. These are common in older adults and can have a major impact on quality of life (QoL) and disability [1]. Geriatric syndromes can best be identified by a comprehensive multidisciplinary

Background The Irish Hip Fracture Database is a national clinical audit developed to improve fracture care and outcomes. Lack of integration with other databases, such as a National Death Register makes determination of longer term outcomes challenging. In hospital mortality is one quality indicator that can be very accurately measured. We sought to determine in-hospital mortality in the Irish Hip Fracture Cohort between 2013 and 2017 and to determine which factors most influenced this outcome with particular reference to the IHFD quality standards. Methods A secondary analysis of the 15,603 patients in the IHFD between 2013 and 2017 was conducted. Descriptive and analytical statistics were produced. Results In-hospital mortality was 4.5% for the 5 years. Univariate logistic regression revealed 11 statistically significant predictors of in-hospital mortality of which only 4 (age, gender, pre-fracture mobility, mobilised day of/after surgery) remained significant after multivariate analysis. The most striking finding was that those patients not mobilised on the day of/after surgery were 46% more likely to die in hospital (OR 1.46, p<0.000, 95% CI 1.25-1.70). Conclusion Measuring care is challenging and often one standard cannot reflect all aspects. The ability to be mobilised on the day of or day after surgery is a good composite measure of both patient and organisational factors in hip fracture care: timely surgery, adequate pain relief, prevention of delirium, admission to a ward with philosophy, skills and resources to encourage early mobility. While early mobility has always been encouraged this data suggests its adoption as a formal standard to which all units must comply.

Fragility fracture audit is key to understanding fragility fracture management, identifying areas for its improvement and measuring the impact of clinical initiatives and service change. Hip fracture can be considered a marker for fragility fractures, and hip fracture audits indirectly show strengths and weaknesses of fragility fracture care overall. Notably, where effective hip fracture care exists, this has a favourable impact on the care of other fragility fractures. Early established audits, clinically led, have used clinical standards and feedback on compliance with them to improve care and outcomes. Although data collection, analysis and feedback require investment, the cost per case amounts to only a very small fraction of the cost of care per case. More recently established audits have also proved effective, and increasingly international collaboration on hip fracture audit is now emerging: an important development in view of demographic projections reflecting first-generation mass ageing in a number of large nations. Parallel developments such as fracture liaison services promote both primary and secondary fracture prevention. In future, automated data collection using reliable electronic health records may facilitate audit and international collaboration and enabling instructive comparisons and, eventually, multinational hip fracture-related clinical and epidemiological research.

This review aimed to describe the methods and results from recent Irish research about post-acute hip fracture outcomes. Meta-analyses estimate the 30-day and 1-year mortality rate at 5% and 24% respectively. There is a need for standardised recommendations about which data should be recorded to aid national and international comparisons. Purpose Over 3700 older adults experience hip fracture in Ireland annually. The Irish Hip Fracture Database national audit records acute hospital data but lacks longer-term outcomes. This systematic review aimed to summarise and appraise recent Irish studies that collected long-term hip fracture outcomes and to generate pooled estimates where appropriate. Methods Electronic databases and grey literature were searched in April 2022 for articles, abstracts, and theses published from 2005 to 2022. Eligible studies were appraised by two authors and outcome collection details summarised. Meta-analyses of studies with common outcomes were conducted where the sample was generalisable to the broad hip fracture population. Results In total, 84 studies were identified from 20 clinical sites. Outcomes commonly recorded were mortality (n = 48 studies; 57%), function (n = 24; 29%), residence (n = 20; 24%), bone-related outcomes (n = 20; 24%), and mobility (n = 17; 20%). One year post-fracture was the most frequent time point, and patient telephone contact was the most common collection method used. Most studies did not report follow-up rates. Two meta-analyses were performed. The pooled estimate for one-year mortality was 24.2% (95% CI = 19.1-29.8%, I 2 = 93.8%, n = 12 studies, n = 4220 patients), and for 30-day mortality was 4.7% (95% CI = 3.6-5.9%, I 2 = 31.3%, n = 7 studies, n = 2092 patients). Reports of non-mortality outcomes were deemed inappropriate for meta-analysis. Conclusion Hip fracture long-term outcomes collected in Irish research are broadly in line with international recommendations. Heterogeneity of measures and poor reporting of methods and findings limits collation of results. Recommendations for standard outcome definitions nationally are warranted. Further research should explore the feasibility of recording longterm outcomes during routine hip fracture care in Ireland to enhance national audit.

No abstract

Background: Hip fracture is experienced by almost 3,500 older people in Ireland annually. The Irish Hip Fracture Database (IHFD), which drives clinical improvements in acute hospitals, aims to allow recording of longer-term outcomes. Feasible and robust methods of data collection need to be identified to inform this activity. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, describe and appraise studies that have collected long-term outcomes after hip fracture in Ireland in the last 15 years and to generate pooled estimates of outcomes if appropriate. Methods: A search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL) and grey literature sources will be conducted for journal articles, conference abstracts, academic theses, and reports. Search terms related to hip fracture and Ireland will be included for most sources. The search will be supplemented by email contact with relevant professionals. Observational and interventional studies published between 2005 and 2021 will be included if outcome data were collected in the Republic of Ireland in patients with hip fracture. Outcomes of interest will include data collected after discharge from an inpatient setting or at a fixed time-point greater than 30 days after fracture, hospital admission or surgery. Information relating to study characteristics, description of researchers, data collection methods, patient characteristics and long-term outcomes will be extracted from each study and summarised in tables. Studies will be assessed for risk of bias by two review authors. Where outcomes are sufficiently homogeneous, meta-analyses of estimates will be conducted. Conclusion: Results from this study will inform the planning of further qualitative research to explore barriers and facilitators of long-term outcome collection in Ireland. It will form the basis of education and training for future data collectors in this setting.