Dataset Information

Significant variations in preoperative fluid resuscitation volumes delivered to elderly hip fracture patients at six level 1 trauma centers: an observational descriptive study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To describe the variations in administration of preoperative (preop) fluids and in the volumes of fluid administered among geriatric hip fracture patients requiring surgical repair.

Design

Observational descriptive.

Setting

Six Level 1 trauma centers.

Patients

A total of 595 patients aged ≥65 with ICD-10 codes indicating hip fracture and surgical repair were identified. Of these, 87.9% (n = 525) received preop fluid. The median volume of preop fluid delivered was 1500 mL (IQR: 1000-2250 mL).

Intervention

None.

Main outcome measures

Receipt of preop fluids; median volume of fluid received.

Results

Receipt of preop fluid was significantly different by inter-hospital transfer, facility, BMI, hospital length of stay, and postop fluid volume. Age, sex, time to surgery, time to ambulation, and hospital disposition were not associated with preop fluid. There were significant differences in median preop fluid volumes by facility and postop fluid volume.

Conclusion

This descriptive study of current practices among geriatric trauma patients with isolated hip fractures revealed significant differences in the use of preop fluid resuscitation and the resuscitation volumes administered. Treating facility may be the most substantial source of variation highlighting the need for a guideline on fluid resuscitation. These observed variations may be a result of patient characteristics or provider discretion and should be evaluated further.

SUBMITTER: Willis J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8716099 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Significant variations in preoperative fluid resuscitation volumes delivered to elderly hip fracture patients at six level 1 trauma centers: an observational descriptive study.

Willis Jordan J Pelzl Casey E CE Jarvis Stephanie S Berg Gina G Corrigan Chad C Madayag Robert R Reynolds Cassandra C Tanner Allen A Marshall Gary G Lieser Mark M Bar-Or David D

OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma 20220103 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To describe the variations in administration of preoperative (preop) fluids and in the volumes of fluid administered among geriatric hip fracture patients requiring surgical repair.<h4>Design</h4>Observational descriptive.<h4>Setting</h4>Six Level 1 trauma centers.<h4>Patients</h4>A total of 595 patients aged ≥65 with ICD-10 codes indicating hip fracture and surgical repair were identified. Of these, 87.9% (n = 525) received preop fluid. The median volume of preop fluid deliver ...[more]

PMID: 34984321

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFemoral shaft fractures are common in major trauma. Early definitive fixation, within 24 hours, is feasible in most patients and is associated with improved outcomes. Nonetheless, variability might exist between trauma centers in timeliness of fixation. Such variability could impact outcomes and would therefore represent a target for quality improvement. We evaluated variability in delayed fixation (≥24 hours) between trauma centers participating in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) and measured the resultant association with important clinical outcomes at the hospital level.Methods and findingsA retrospective cohort study was performed using data derived from the ACS TQIP database. Adults with severe injury who underwent definitive fixation of a femoral shaft fracture at a level I or II trauma center participating in ACS TQIP (2012-2015) were included. Patient baseline and injury characteristics that might affect timing of fixation were considered. A hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of delayed fixation. Hospital variability in delayed fixation was measured using 2 approaches. First, the random effects output of the hierarchical model was used to identify outlier hospitals where the odds of delayed fixation were significantly higher or lower than average. Second, the median odds ratio (MOR) was calculated to quantify heterogeneity in delayed fixation between hospitals. Finally, complications (pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pneumonia, decubitus ulcer, and death) and hospital length of stay were compared across quartiles of risk-adjusted delayed fixation. We identified 17,993 patients who underwent definitive fixation at 216 trauma centers. The median injury severity score (ISS) was 13 (interquartile range [IQR] 9-22). Median time to fixation was 15 hours (IQR 7-24 hours) and delayed fixation was performed in 26% of patients. After adjusting for patient characteristics, 57 hospitals (26%) were identified as outliers, reflecting significant practice variation unexplained by patient case mix. The MOR was 1.84, reflecting heterogeneity in delayed fixation across centers. Compared to hospitals in the lowest quartile of delayed fixation, patients treated at hospitals in the highest quartile of delayed fixation suffered 2-fold higher rates of pulmonary embolism (2.6% versus 1.3%; rate ratio [RR] 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.2; P = 0.005) and required greater length of stay (7 versus 6 days; RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.1-1.19; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference with respect to mortality (1.3% versus 0.8%; RR 1.6; 95% CI 1.0-2.8; P = 0.066). The main limitations of this study include the inability to classify fractures by severity, challenges related to the heterogeneity of the study population, and the potential for residual confounding due to unmeasured factors.ConclusionsIn this large cohort study of 216 trauma centers, significant practice variability was observed in delayed fixation of femoral shaft fractures, which could not be explained by differences in patient case mix. Patients treated at centers where delayed fixation was most common were at significantly greater risk of pulmonary embolism and required longer hospital stay. Trauma centers should strive to minimize delays in fixation, and quality improvement initiatives should emphasize this recommendation in best practice guidelines.

Project description:IntroductionThe American Heart Association (AHA) recommends regionalized care following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) at cardiac resuscitation centers (CRCs). Key level 1 CRC criteria include 24/7 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capability, therapeutic hypothermia capability, and annual volume of ≥40 patients resuscitated from OHCA. Our objective was to characterize the availability and utilization of resources relevant to post-cardiac arrest care, including level 1 CRCs in California.MethodsWe combined data from the AHA, the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), and surveys to identify CRCs. We surveyed emergency department directors and nurse managers at all 24/7 PCI centers identified by the AHA to determine their post-OHCA care capabilities. The survey included questions regarding therapeutic hypothermia use and specialist availability and was pilot-tested prior to distribution. Cases of OHCA were identified in the 2011 OSHPD Patient Discharge Database using a "present on admission" diagnosis of cardiac arrest (ICD-9-CM code 427.5). We defined key level 1 CRC criteria as 24/7 PCI capability, therapeutic hypothermia, and annual volume ≥40 patients admitted with a "present on admission" diagnosis of cardiac arrest. Our primary outcome was the proportion of hospitals meeting these criteria. Descriptive statistics and 95% CI are presented.ResultsOf the 333 acute care hospitals in California, 31 (9.3%, 95% CI 6.4-13%) met level 1 CRC criteria. These hospitals treated 25% (1937/7780; 95% CI 24-26%) of all admitted OHCA patients in California in 2011. Of the 125 hospitals identified as 24/7 PCI centers by the AHA, 54 (43%, 95% CI 34-52%) admitted ≥40 patients following OHCA in 2011. Seventy (56%, 95% CI 47-65%) responded to the survey; 69/70 (99%, 95% CI 92-100%) reported having a therapeutic hypothermia protocol in effect by 2011. Five percent of admitted OHCA patients (402/7780; 95% CI 4.7-5.7%) received therapeutic hypothermia and 18% (1372/7780; 95% CI 17-19%) underwent cardiac catheterization.ConclusionApproximately 10% of hospitals met key criteria for AHA level 1 CRCs. These hospitals treated one-quarter of patients resuscitated from OHCA in 2011. The feasibility of regionalized care for OHCA requires detailed evaluation prior to widespread implementation.

Project description:Prior high-trauma fractures identified through health services data are associated with low bone mineral density (BMD) and future fracture risk to the same extent as fractures without high-trauma.IntroductionSome have questioned the usefulness of distinguishing high-trauma fractures from low-trauma fractures. The aim of this study is to compare BMD measurements and risk of subsequent low-trauma fracture in patients with prior high- or low-trauma fractures.MethodsUsing a clinical BMD registry for the province of Manitoba, Canada, we identified women and men age 40 years or older with fracture records from linked population-based healthcare data. Age- and sex-adjusted BMD Z-scores and covariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for incident fracture were studied in relation to prior fracture status, categorized as high-trauma if associated with external injury codes and low-trauma otherwise.ResultsThe study population consisted of 64,428 women and men with no prior fracture (mean age 63.7 years), 858 with prior high-trauma fractures (mean age 65.1 years), and 14,758 with prior low-trauma fractures (mean age 67.2 years). Mean Z-scores for those with any prior high-trauma fracture were significantly lower than in those without prior fracture (P < 0.001) and similar to those with prior low-trauma fracture. Median observation time for incident fractures was 8.8 years (total 729,069 person-years). Any prior high-trauma fracture was significantly associated with increased risk for incident major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) (adjusted HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08-1.59) as was prior low-trauma fracture (adjusted HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.47-1.63), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (prior trauma versus low-trauma fracture P = 0.093). A similar pattern was seen when incident MOF was studied in relation to prior hip fracture or prior MOF, or when the outcome was incident hip fracture or any incident fracture.ConclusionsHigh-trauma and low-trauma fractures showed similar relationships with low BMD and future fracture risk. This supports the inclusion of high-trauma fractures in clinical assessment for underlying osteoporosis and in the evaluation for intervention to reduce future fracture risk.

Project description:BackgroundPrehospital triage protocols typically try to select patients with Injury Severity Score (ISS) above 15 for direct transportation to a Level-1 trauma center. However, ISS does not necessarily discriminate between patients who benefit from immediate care at Level-1 trauma centers. The aim of this study was to assess which patients benefit from direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers.MethodsWe used the American National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB), a retrospective observational cohort. All adult patients (ISS > 3) between 2015 and 2016 were included. Patients who were self-presenting or had isolated limb injury were excluded. We used logistic regression to assess the association of direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers with in-hospital mortality adjusted for clinically relevant confounders. We used this model to define benefit as predicted probability of mortality associated with transportation to a non-Level-1 trauma center minus predicted probability associated with transportation to a Level-1 trauma center. We used a threshold of 1% as absolute benefit. Potential interaction terms with transportation to Level-1 trauma centers were included in a penalized logistic regression model to study which patients benefit.ResultsWe included 388,845 trauma patients from 232 Level-1 centers and 429 Level-2/3 centers. A small beneficial effect was found for direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers (adjusted Odds Ratio: 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.92-0.99) which disappeared when comparing Level-1 and 2 versus Level-3 trauma centers. In the risk approach, predicted benefit ranged between 0 and 1%. When allowing for interactions, 7% of the patients (n = 27,753) had more than 1% absolute benefit from direct transportation to Level-1 trauma centers. These patients had higher AIS Head and Thorax scores, lower GCS and lower SBP. A quarter of the patients with ISS > 15 were predicted to benefit from transportation to Level-1 centers (n = 26,522, 22%).ConclusionsBenefit of transportation to a Level-1 trauma centers is quite heterogeneous across patients and the difference between Level-1 and Level-2 trauma centers is small. In particular, patients with head injury and signs of shock may benefit from care in a Level-1 trauma center. Future prehospital triage models should incorporate more complete risk profiles.

Dataset Information

Significant variations in preoperative fluid resuscitation volumes delivered to elderly hip fracture patients at six level 1 trauma centers: an observational descriptive study.

Objective

Design

Setting

Patients

Intervention

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Significant variations in preoperative fluid resuscitation volumes delivered to elderly hip fracture patients at six level 1 trauma centers: an observational descriptive study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets