Geriatric fracture centre vs usual care after proximal femur fracture in older patients: what are the benefits? Results of a large international prospective multicentre study

dc.centroFacultad de Medicinaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorBlauth, Michael
dc.contributor.authorJoeris, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorRometsch, Elke
dc.contributor.authorEspinoza-Rebmann, Kathrin
dc.contributor.authorWattanapanom, Pannida
dc.contributor.authorJarayabhand, Rahat
dc.contributor.authorPoeze, Martijn
dc.contributor.authorWong, Merng K
dc.contributor.authorKwek, Ernest B K
dc.contributor.authorHegeman, Johannes H
dc.contributor.authorPerez-Uribarri, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorGuerado-Parra, Enrique
dc.contributor.authorRevak, Thomas J
dc.contributor.authorZohner, Sebastian
dc.contributor.authorJoseph, David
dc.contributor.authorGosch, Markus
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-07T10:34:55Z
dc.date.available2025-01-07T10:34:55Z
dc.date.issued2021-05-10
dc.departamentoEspecialidades Quirúrgicas, Bioquímica e Inmunología
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of treatment in geriatric fracture centres (GFC) on the incidence of major adverse events (MAEs) in patients with hip fractures compared with usual care centres (UCC). Secondary objectives included hospital-workflow and mobility-related outcomes. Design: Cohort study recruiting patients between June 2015 and January 2017. Follow-up was 1 year. Setting: International (six countries, three continents) multicentre study. Participants: 281 patients aged ≥70 with operatively treated proximal femur fractures. Interventions: Treatment in UCCs (n=139) or GFCs (n=142), that is, interdisciplinary treatment including regular geriatric consultation and daily physiotherapy. Outcome measures: Primary outcome was occurrence of prespecified MAEs, including delirium. Secondary outcomes included any other adverse events, time to surgery, time in acute ward, 1-year mortality, mobility, and quality of life. Results: Patients treated in GFCs (n=142) had a mean age of 81.9 (SD, 6.6) years versus 83.9 (SD 6.9) years in patients (n=139) treated in UCCs (p=0.013) and a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2.0 (SD, 2.1) versus 1.2 (SD, 1.5) in UCCs (p=0.001). More patients in GFCs (28.2%) experienced an MAE during the first year after surgery compared with UCCs (7.9%) with an OR of 4.56 (95% CI 2.23 to 9.34, p<0.001). Analysing individual MAEs, this was significant for pneumonia (GFC: 9.2%; UCC: 2.9%; OR, 3.40 (95% CI 1.08 to 10.70), p=0.027) and delirium (GFC: 11.3%; UCC: 2.2%, OR, 5.76 (95% CI 1.64 to 20.23), p=0.002). Conclusions: Contrary to our study hypothesis, the rate of MAEs was higher in GFCs than in UCCs. Delirium was revealed as a main contributor. Most likely, this was based on improved detection rather than a truly elevated incidence, which we interpret as positive effect of geriatric comanagement.es_ES
dc.identifier.citationBlauth M, Joeris A, Rometsch E, Espinoza-Rebmann K, Wattanapanom P, Jarayabhand R, Poeze M, Wong MK, Kwek EBK, Hegeman JH, Perez-Uribarri C, Guerado E, Revak TJ, Zohner S, Joseph D, Gosch M. Geriatric fracture centre vs usual care after proximal femur fracture in older patients: what are the benefits? Results of a large international prospective multicentre study. BMJ Open. 2021 May 10;11(5):e039960. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039960. PMID: 33972329; PMCID: PMC8112430.es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039960
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10630/35874
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherBMJ Journalses_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectCadera - Lesiones y heridases_ES
dc.subject.otherGeriatric medicinees_ES
dc.subject.otherHealth services administration & managementes_ES
dc.subject.otherHipes_ES
dc.subject.otherOrthopaedic & trauma surgeryes_ES
dc.subject.otherTrauma managementes_ES
dc.titleGeriatric fracture centre vs usual care after proximal femur fracture in older patients: what are the benefits? Results of a large international prospective multicentre studyes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication19893c94-01fa-46f5-b040-a588016d1e32
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery19893c94-01fa-46f5-b040-a588016d1e32

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
BMJ OPEN 2020.pdf
Size:
595.48 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Artículo principal
Download

Description: Artículo principal

Collections