Cargando…
Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries
PURPOSE: Hip fractures are of growing interest due to their increasing number, subsequent functional decline and high institutionalization rate of patients, mortality, and costs. Several process measurements are essential for hip fracture care. To compare and improve these, hip fracture registries i...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9192454/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34623474 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01797-8 |
_version_ | 1784726245175459840 |
---|---|
author | Werner, Maic Macke, Christian Gogol, Manfred Krettek, Christian Liodakis, Emmanouil |
author_facet | Werner, Maic Macke, Christian Gogol, Manfred Krettek, Christian Liodakis, Emmanouil |
author_sort | Werner, Maic |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Hip fractures are of growing interest due to their increasing number, subsequent functional decline and high institutionalization rate of patients, mortality, and costs. Several process measurements are essential for hip fracture care. To compare and improve these, hip fracture registries in Europe became popular. This systematic review aims to describe the differences between hip fracture registries in Europe as well as the differences in hip fracture treatment between countries. METHODS: A systematic search using the keywords “hip fracture” AND “national” AND “database OR audit OR registry OR register” was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library according to PRISMA guidelines till 3rd December 2020. Recent annual reports of identified hip fracture registries in Europe were additionally identified in June 2021. Comparisons of most common case-mix, process and outcome measurements were performed. RESULTS: 11 registries in Europe were identified. Differences were observed regarding inclusion criteria of the different registries. Comparison of the different registries was difficult due to differences in the way to report measurements. While mortality rates differed substantially between countries, most of the process measurements met recommendations according to recent guidelines. CONCLUSION: Hip fracture registries were a valid tool to compare hospitals within one country. However, a comparison between registries of different countries should have also been easily possible. For this, the registries need to make their data easily accessible and further unify their way of measuring and reporting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9192454 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91924542022-06-15 Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries Werner, Maic Macke, Christian Gogol, Manfred Krettek, Christian Liodakis, Emmanouil Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Review Article PURPOSE: Hip fractures are of growing interest due to their increasing number, subsequent functional decline and high institutionalization rate of patients, mortality, and costs. Several process measurements are essential for hip fracture care. To compare and improve these, hip fracture registries in Europe became popular. This systematic review aims to describe the differences between hip fracture registries in Europe as well as the differences in hip fracture treatment between countries. METHODS: A systematic search using the keywords “hip fracture” AND “national” AND “database OR audit OR registry OR register” was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library according to PRISMA guidelines till 3rd December 2020. Recent annual reports of identified hip fracture registries in Europe were additionally identified in June 2021. Comparisons of most common case-mix, process and outcome measurements were performed. RESULTS: 11 registries in Europe were identified. Differences were observed regarding inclusion criteria of the different registries. Comparison of the different registries was difficult due to differences in the way to report measurements. While mortality rates differed substantially between countries, most of the process measurements met recommendations according to recent guidelines. CONCLUSION: Hip fracture registries were a valid tool to compare hospitals within one country. However, a comparison between registries of different countries should have also been easily possible. For this, the registries need to make their data easily accessible and further unify their way of measuring and reporting. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-10-08 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9192454/ /pubmed/34623474 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01797-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article Werner, Maic Macke, Christian Gogol, Manfred Krettek, Christian Liodakis, Emmanouil Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title | Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title_full | Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title_fullStr | Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title_short | Differences in hip fracture care in Europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
title_sort | differences in hip fracture care in europe: a systematic review of recent annual reports of hip fracture registries |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9192454/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34623474 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01797-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wernermaic differencesinhipfracturecareineuropeasystematicreviewofrecentannualreportsofhipfractureregistries AT mackechristian differencesinhipfracturecareineuropeasystematicreviewofrecentannualreportsofhipfractureregistries AT gogolmanfred differencesinhipfracturecareineuropeasystematicreviewofrecentannualreportsofhipfractureregistries AT krettekchristian differencesinhipfracturecareineuropeasystematicreviewofrecentannualreportsofhipfractureregistries AT liodakisemmanouil differencesinhipfracturecareineuropeasystematicreviewofrecentannualreportsofhipfractureregistries |