Haugan Kristin, Johnsen Lars G, Basso Trude, Foss Olav A
Department of Orthopaedics, Orthopaedic Research Centre, St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 29;7(8):e015574. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015574.
To compare the efficacies of two pathways-conventional and fast-track care-in patients with hip fracture.
Retrospective single-centre study.
University hospital in middle Norway.
1820 patients aged ≥65 years with hip fracture (intracapsular, intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric).
788 patients were treated according to conventional care from April 2008 to September 2011, and 1032 patients were treated according to fast-track care from October 2011 to December 2013.
Primary: mortality and readmission to hospital, within 365 days follow-up. Secondary: length of stay.
We found no statistically significant differences in mortality and readmission rate between patients in the fast-track and conventional care models within 365 days after the initial hospital admission. The conventional care group had a higher, no statistical significant mortality HR of 1.10 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.31, p=0.326) without and 1.16 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.40, p=0.118) with covariate adjustment. Regarding the readmission, the conventional care group sub-HR was 1.02 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.18, p=0.822) without and 0.97 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.12, p=0.644) with adjusting for covariates. Length of stay and time to surgery was statistically significant shorter for patients who received fast-track care, a mean difference of 3.4 days and 6 hours, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in sex, type of fracture, age or Charlson Comorbidity Index score at baseline between patients in the two pathways.
There was insufficient evidence to show an impact of fast-track care on mortality and readmission. Length of stay and time to surgery were decreased.
NCT00667914; results.
比较两种治疗途径——传统治疗和快速康复治疗——对髋部骨折患者的疗效。
回顾性单中心研究。
挪威中部的大学医院。
1820例年龄≥65岁的髋部骨折(囊内、转子间或转子下)患者。
2008年4月至2011年9月,788例患者接受传统治疗;2011年10月至2013年12月,1032例患者接受快速康复治疗。
主要结局:随访365天内的死亡率和再入院率。次要结局:住院时间。
我们发现,在初次入院后365天内,快速康复治疗组和传统治疗组患者的死亡率和再入院率在统计学上无显著差异。传统治疗组的死亡率HR较高,未进行协变量调整时为1.10(95%CI 0.91至1.31,p = 0.326),进行协变量调整后为1.16(95%CI 0.96至1.40,p = 0.118),但均无统计学意义。关于再入院情况,传统治疗组未进行协变量调整时的亚HR为1.02(95%CI 0.88至1.18,p = 0.822),进行协变量调整后为0.97(95%CI 0.83至1.12,p = 0.644)。接受快速康复治疗的患者住院时间和手术时间在统计学上显著缩短,平均差异分别为3.4天和6小时。两种治疗途径的患者在基线时的性别、骨折类型、年龄或Charlson合并症指数评分无统计学显著差异。
没有足够的证据表明快速康复治疗对死亡率和再入院率有影响。住院时间和手术时间缩短。
NCT00667914;结果