The NHFS, with an updated equation, is a robust predictor of 30 day mortality after hip fracture repair in geographically distinct UK centres.

SummaryWe re-analysed prospective data collected by anaesthetists in the Anaesthesia Sprint Audit of Practice (ASAP-1) to describe associations with linked outcome data. Mortality was 165/11,085 (1.5%) 5 days and 563/11,085 (5.1%) 30 days after surgery and was not associated with anaesthetic technique (general vs. spinal, with or without peripheral nerve blockade). The risk of death increased as blood pressure fell: the odds ratio (95% CI) for mortality within five days after surgery was 0.983 (0.973-0.994) for each 5 mmHg intra-operative increment in systolic blood pressure, p = 0.0016, and 0.980 (0.967-0.993) for each mmHg increment in mean pressure, p = 0.0039. The equivalent odds ratios (95% CI) for 30-day mortality were 0.968 (0.951-0.985), p = 0.0003 and 0.976 (0.964-0.988), p = 0.0001, respectively. The lowest systolic blood pressure after intrathecal local anaesthetic relative to before induction was weakly correlated with a higher volume of subarachnoid bupivacaine: r 2 À0.10 and À0.16 for hyperbaric and isobaric bupivacaine, respectively. A mean 20% relative fall in systolic blood pressure correlated with an administered volume of 1.44 ml hyperbaric bupivacaine. Future research should focus on refining standardised anaesthesia towards administering lower doses of spinal (and general) anaesthesia and maintaining normotension.

Summary Large observational studies of accurate data can provide similar results to more arduous and expensive randomised controlled trials. In 2012, the National Hip Fracture Database extended its dataset to include ‘type of anaesthesia’ data fields. We analysed 65 535 patient record sets to determine differences in outcome. Type of anaesthesia was recorded in 59 191 (90%) patients. Omitting patients who received both general and spinal anaesthesia or in whom an uncertain type of anaesthesia was recorded, there was no significant difference in either cumulative five‐day (2.8% vs 2.8%, p = 0.991) or 30‐day (7.0% vs 7.5%, p = 0.053) mortality between 30 130 patients receiving general anaesthesia and 22 999 patients receiving spinal anaesthesia, even when 30‐day mortality was adjusted for age and ASA physical status (p = 0.226). Mortality within 24 hours after surgery was significantly higher among patients receiving cemented compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty (1.6% vs 1.2%, p = 0.030), suggesting excess early mortality related to bone cement implantation syndrome. If these data are accurate, then either there is no difference in 30‐day mortality between general and spinal anaesthesia after hip fracture surgery per se, and therefore future research should focus on how to make both types of anaesthesia safer, or there is a difference, but mortality is not the correct outcome to measure after anaesthesia, and therefore future research should focus on differences between general and spinal anaesthesia. These could include more anaesthesia‐sensitive outcomes, such as hypotension, pain, postoperative confusion, respiratory infection and mobilisation.

No abstract

These results demonstrate the utility of SNP genotyping data for detection of clinically significant abnormalities, including chimerism/mosaicism and recessive Mendelian disorders associated with autozygosity. The incidence of clinically significant low level mosaicism inferred from these cases suggests that this has hitherto been underestimated and chromosome mosaicism frequently occurs in the absence of indicative clinical features. The growing appreciation among clinicians and demand for SNP genotyping data poses significant challenges for the interpretation of LCSH, especially where there is no detailed phenotypic description to direct laboratory analysis. Finally, reporting of unexpected or hidden consanguinity revealed by SNP array analysis raises potential ethical and legal issues.

Increasing numbers of people are trying to reduce and recycle their domestic waste, but hospitals have been slower to get the message. David Hutchins and Stuart White look at the potential environmental and financial benefits

SummaryThe care of the elderly with hip fractures and their outcomes might be improved with resources targeted by the accurate calculation of risks of mortality and morbidity. We used a multicentre national dataset to evaluate and recalibrate the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score and Surgical Outcome Risk Tool. We split 9,017 hip fracture cases from the Anaesthesia Sprint Audit of Practice into derivation and validation data sets and used logistic regression to derive new model co-efficients for death at 30 postoperative days. The area (95% CI) under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.71 (0.67-0.75) indicated acceptable discrimination by the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score and acceptable calibration fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow test), p = 0.23, with a similar discrimination by the Surgical Outcome Risk Tool, 0.70 (0.66-0.74), which was miscalibrated to the observed data, p = 0.001. We recommend that studies test these scores for patients with hip fractures in other countries. We also recommend these models are compared with case-mix adjustment tools used in the UK.

Summary We convened a multidisciplinary Working Party on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists to update the 2011 guidance on the peri‐operative management of people with hip fracture. Importantly, these guidelines describe the core aims and principles of peri‐operative management, recommending greater standardisation of anaesthetic practice as a component of multidisciplinary care. Although much of the 2011 guidance remains applicable to contemporary practice, new evidence and consensus inform the additional recommendations made in this document. Specific changes to the 2011 guidance relate to analgesia, medicolegal practice, risk assessment, bone cement implantation syndrome and regional review networks. Areas of controversy remain, and we discuss these in further detail, relating to the mode of anaesthesia, surgical delay, blood management and transfusion thresholds, echocardiography, anticoagulant and antiplatelet management and postoperative discharge destination. Finally, these guidelines provide links to supplemental online material that can be used at readers' institutions, key references and UK national guidance about the peri‐operative care of people with hip and periprosthetic fractures during the COVID‐19 pandemic.