Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Audit of geriatric hip fracture care – a Slovenian trauma center analysis

  • geriatrics: at crossroads of medicine
  • Published:
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Background

The aim was to describe an audit of hip fracture patient care and outcomes in a Slovenian healthcare setting prior to the implementation of the Geriatric Fracture Center (GFC) model of care.

Methods

The Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) hip fracture audit database was used to collect data on hip fracture care in elderly patients. Epidemiological data were submitted as well as fracture type, prefracture residence and mobility prior to the fracture. The timeline of events and acute care data were also collected. Follow-up after 30 days included hip-related readmission, mobility, residence and life status.

Results

Included were 495 patients with a mean age of 81 years of which 20% were preoperatively seen by a physician or geriatrician, 93.1% had surgical repair, 58.5% of them within 48 h of admission. The mortality rate in hospital was 5.4% and 10.1% at follow-up, 61.8% patients were able to return to prefracture residency and 23% could walk with minor assistance.

Conclusion

This comprehensive and detailed audit report provides baseline data on case-mix, care and outcomes following hip fractures in Slovenia, in advance of planned quality improvement work in geriatric fracture care and provides a strong basis for the assessment of the impact of the GFC model of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pretto M, Spirig R, Kaelin R, et al. Outcomes of elderly hip fracture patients in the Swiss healthcare system. A survey prior to the implementation of DRGs and prior to the implementation of a Geriatric Fracture Centre. Swiss Med Wkly. 2010;140:w13086.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Svedbom A, Hernlund E, Ivergård M, et al. Osteoporosis in the European Union: a compendium of country-specific reports. Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:137.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Komadina R, Senekovič V, Dolenc I, et al. Recommendations for hip fracture management in Slovenia. Zdrav Vestn. 2012;81:183–92.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ellanti P, Cushen B, Galbraith A. Improving hip fracture care in Ireland: a preliminary report of the Irish hip fracture database. J Osteoporos. 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/656357.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. British Orthopaedic Association, British Geriatric Society. The care of patients with fragility fracture (“blue book”). London: British Orthopaedic Association and British Geriatric Society; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kammerlander C, Gosch M, Blauth M, et al. The Tyrolean Geriatric Fracture Center: an orthogeriatric co-management model. Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2011;44(6):363–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. National Hip Fracture Database National Report 2013, http://www.nhfd.co.uk/20/hipfractureR.nsf/docs/reports2016, 21.11.2016

  8. Moran CG, Wenn RT, Sikand M, et al. Early mortality after hip fracture: is delay before surgery important? J Bone Joint Surg. 2005;3:483–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. National Clinical Guideline Centre. The Management of Hip Fracture in Adults. London: National Clinical Guideline Centre; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  10. White SM, Moppett IK, Griffiths R. Outcome by mode of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. An observational audit of 65 535 patients in a national dataset. Anaesthesia. 2014;69:224–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Neuburger J, Currie C, Wakeman R, et al. The impact of a national clinician-led audit initiative on care and mortality after hip fracture in England: an external evaluation using time trends in non-audit data. Med Care. 2015;53:686–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trauma Department, General and Teaching hospital Celje, Oblakova 5, 3000, Celje, Slovenia

    Dejan Krušič, Drago Brilej & Radko Komadina

  2. Formerly of Geriatric Medicine Unit, School of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, Edinburgh University, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Colin Currie

Authors
  1. Dejan Krušič
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Drago Brilej
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Colin Currie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Radko Komadina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Drago Brilej.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

D. Krušič, D. Brilej, C. Currie and R. Komadina declare that they have no conflict of interests. declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

For this type of the study formal consent is not required. The Study has been reviewed by ethics committee. Details that might disclose the identity of the patients included are omitted.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krušič, D., Brilej, D., Currie, C. et al. Audit of geriatric hip fracture care – a Slovenian trauma center analysis. Wien Klin Wochenschr 128 (Suppl 7), 527–534 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-016-1137-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-016-1137-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation