Advertisement

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 273–278 | Cite as

Improved outcomes following implementation of a multidisciplinary care pathway for elderly hip fractures

  • Raina WallaceEmail author
  • L. D. George Angus
  • Swapna Munnangi
  • Sally Shukry
  • Jody C. DiGiacomo
  • Charles Ruotolo
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Hip fractures in patients 65 years and older are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. With the steady increase in the elderly population, we implemented an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the management of hip fractures to optimize patient care and surgical outcomes.

Aims

To evaluate the effects of a multidisciplinary hip fracture care pathway on patient outcomes in the care of elderly patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the differences in outcomes prior to (January–October 2014) and after (November 2014–April 2016) implementation of a hip fracture care pathway at a regional Level I trauma center was performed.

Results

There were 80 patients in the pre-pathway group and 191 patients in the post-pathway group with an average age of 83.18 ± 8.24 years. The analysis demonstrated that the post-pathway group had a lower incidence of in-hospital complications (9.95 vs 30.00%; p ≤ 0.001), shorter emergency room length of stay (3.76 ± 2.43 vs 6.78 ± 2.88 h; p ≤ 0.0001), and shorter overall hospital length of stay (5.03 ± 3.46 vs 7.44 ± 6.66 days; p = 0.0028). The in-hospital mortality rate was similar between groups (4.71 vs 6.25%; p = 0.6018).

Discussion

The development of a multidisciplinary approach to the care of elderly patients with hip fractures improved morbidity and showed a downward trend in mortality.

Conclusions

Elderly patients with hip fractures treated at our trauma center had improved clinical outcomes after the implementation of a multidisciplinary care pathway.

Keywords

Hip fracture Falls Trauma Elderly Quality improvement 

Notes

Funding

No funding received or required.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

Research involving human participants was done post-approval in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

For this kind of study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Injury Prevention & Control [Internet]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2017) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html. Accessed 3 Aug 2017
  2. 2.
    Tromp AM, Pluijm SMF, Smit JH et al (2001) Fall-risk screening test. J Clin Epidemiol 54:837–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shumway-Cook A, Ciol MA, Hoffman J et al (2009) Falls in the medicare population: incidence, associated factors, and impact on health care. Phys Ther 89:324–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braithwaite RS, Col NF, Wong JB (2003) Estimating hip fracture morbidity, mortality and costs. J Am Geriatr Soc 51:364–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Melton LJ (1993) Hip fractures: a worldwide problem today and tomorrow. Bone 14(Suppl 1):S1-S8Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yeh H-F, Shao J-H, Li C-L et al (2017) Predictors of postoperative falls in the first and second postoperative years among older hip fracture patients. J Clin Nurs 26:3710–3723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pedersen SJ, Borgbjerg FM, Schousboe B et al (2008) A comprehensive hip fracture program reduces complication rates and mortality. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:1831–1838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berry SD, Samelson EJ, Bordes M et al (2009) Survival of aged nursing home residents with hip fracture. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 64:771–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Paksima N, Koval KJ, Aharanoff G et al (2008) Predictors of mortality after hip fracture: a 10-year prospective study. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 66:111–117Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Phy MP, Vanness DJ, Melton LJ et al (2005) Effects of a hospitalist model on elderly patients with hip fracture. Arch Intern Med 165:796–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    von Friesendorff M, Besjakov J, Akesson K (2008) Long-term survival and fracture risk after hip fracture: a 22-year follow-up in women. J Bone Miner Res 23:1832–1841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rapp K, Becker C, Lamb SE et al (2008) Hip fractures in institutionalized elderly people: incidence rates and excess mortality. J Bone Miner Res 23:1825–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wehren LE, Hawkes WG, Orwig DL et al (2003) Gender differences in mortality after hip fracture: the role of infection. J Bone Miner Res 18:2231–2237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Richmond J, Aharonoff GB, Zuckerman JD et al (2003) Mortality risk after hip fracture. J Orthop Trauma 17(1):53–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haentjens P, Magaziner J, Colón-Emeric CS et al (2010) Meta-analysis: excess mortality after hip fracture among older women and men. Ann Intern Med 152(6):380–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cartagena LJ, Kang A, Munnangi S et al (2017) Risk factors associated with in-hospital mortality in elderly patients admitted to a regional trauma center after sustaining a fall. Aging Clin Exp Res 29:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brox WT, Roberts KC (2017) Management of Hip Fractures in the Elderly [Internet]. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Quality Guidelines. https://www.aaos.org/CustomTemplates/Content.aspx?id=6395&ssopc=1. Accessed 3 Aug 2017
  18. 18.
    Friedman SM, Mendelson DA, Kates SL et al (2008) Geriatric co-management of proximal femur fractures: total quality management and protocol-driven care result in better outcomes for a frail patient population. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:1349–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kates SL, Mendelson DA, Friedman SM (2010) Co-managed care for fragility hip fractures (Rochester model). Osteoporos Int 21(S4):621–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beaupre LA, Cinats JG, Senthilselvan A et al (2006) Reduced morbidity for elderly patients with a hip fracture after implementation of a perioperative evidence-based clinical pathway. Qual Saf Health Care 15:375–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Friedman SM, Mendelson DA, Bingham KW et al (2009) Impact of a comanaged Geriatric Fracture Center on short-term hip fracture outcomes. Arch Intern Med 169:1712–1717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fisher AA, Davis MW, Rubenach SE et al (2006) Outcomes for older patients with hip fractures: the impact of orthopedic and geriatric medicine cocare. J Orthop Trauma 20:172–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rotondo MF, Cribari C, Smith RS (2018) Resources for optimal care of the injured patient [Internet]. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma. 2014 [cited 2018Mar18]. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/trauma/vrc/resources. Accessed 18 Mar 2018

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryNassau University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of OrthopedicsNassau University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations