Departments of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation (B.J.M.) and Internal Medicine (X.L, P.C.), 200 Hawkins Drive, 01025 JPP, Iowa City, IA 52242. E-mail address for B.J. Miller:
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Sep 18;95(18):e132. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01163.
We examined trends in the treatment of femoral neck fractures over the last two decades.
We used Medicare Part A administrative data to identify patients hospitalized for closed femoral neck fracture from 1991 to 2008. We used codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, to categorize treatment as nonoperative, internal fixation, hemiarthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty. We examined differences in treatment according to hospital hip fracture volume, hospital location (rural or urban), and teaching status.
Our sample consisted of 1,119,423 patients with intracapsular hip fractures occurring from 1991 to 2008. We found a generally stable trend over time in the percentage of patients managed with nonoperative treatment, internal fixation, hemiarthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty. We found little difference in surgical treatment across different groups of hospitals (high volume compared with low volume, urban compared with rural, and teaching compared with nonteaching). The percentage of acute care hospitals treating hip fractures remained fairly constant (74.8% in 1991 to 1993 and 69.0% in 2006 to 2008). The median number of hip fractures treated per hospital did not change (thirty-three in 1991 to 1993 and thirty-three in 2006 to 2008). There was no increase in the percentage of fractures treated in high-volume hospitals over time (57.7% in 1991 to 1993 and 57.1% in 2006 to 2008) and little reduction in the percentage of fractures treated in low-volume hospitals (5.8% in 1991 to 1993 and 5.5% in 2006 to 2008).
There has been little change in the trends of operative and nonoperative treatment for proximal femoral fractures over the last two decades, and there was little evidence of regionalization of hip fracture treatment to higher-volume hospitals.
我们研究了过去二十年中股骨颈骨折治疗趋势的变化。
我们使用医疗保险 A 部分行政数据,从 1991 年至 2008 年确定因闭合性股骨颈骨折住院的患者。我们使用国际疾病分类,第九版的代码,将治疗方法分为非手术、内固定、半髋关节置换和全髋关节置换。我们根据医院髋部骨折的数量、医院位置(农村或城市)和教学地位,研究了治疗方法的差异。
我们的样本包括 1119423 例 1991 年至 2008 年发生的囊内髋部骨折患者。我们发现,随着时间的推移,接受非手术治疗、内固定、半髋关节置换和全髋关节置换的患者比例总体上保持稳定。我们发现不同医院群体之间的手术治疗方法差异不大(高容量与低容量、城市与农村、教学与非教学)。急性护理医院治疗髋部骨折的比例相当稳定(1991 年至 1993 年为 74.8%,2006 年至 2008 年为 69.0%)。医院治疗的髋部骨折中位数数量没有变化(1991 年至 1993 年为 33 例,2006 年至 2008 年为 33 例)。高容量医院治疗的骨折比例没有随时间增加(1991 年至 1993 年为 57.7%,2006 年至 2008 年为 57.1%),低容量医院治疗的骨折比例也没有明显减少(1991 年至 1993 年为 5.8%,2006 年至 2008 年为 5.5%)。
在过去的二十年中,股骨近端骨折的手术和非手术治疗趋势变化不大,髋部骨折治疗向高容量医院的区域化程度也较低。