Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Br J Anaesth. 2022 Jan;128(1):198-206. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.10.011. Epub 2021 Nov 16.
Unwarranted variation in anaesthesia practice is associated with adverse outcomes. Despite high-certainty evidence of benefit, a minority of hip fracture surgery patients receive a peripheral nerve block. Our objective was to estimate variation in peripheral nerve block use at the hospital, anaesthetist, and patient levels, while identifying predictors of peripheral nerve block use in hip fracture patients.
After protocol registration (https://osf.io/48bvp/), we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study using linked administrative data in Ontario, Canada. We included adults >65 yr of age having emergency hip fracture surgery from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2018. Logistic mixed models were used to estimate the variation in peripheral nerve block use attributable to hospital-, anaesthetist-, and patient-level factors with use of peripheral nerve block, quantified using the variance partition coefficient and median odds ratio. Predictors of peripheral nerve block use were estimated and temporally validated.
Of 50 950 patients, 9144 (18.5%) received a peripheral nerve block within 1 day of surgery. Patient-level factors accounted for 14% of variation, whereas 42% and 44% were attributable to the hospital and anaesthetist providing care, respectively. The median odds ratio for receiving a peripheral nerve block was 5.73 at the hospital level and 5.97 at the anaesthetist level. No patient factors had large associations with receipt of a peripheral nerve block (odds ratios significant at the 5% level ranged from 0.86 to 1.35).
Patient factors explain the minimal variation in peripheral nerve block use for hip fracture surgery. Interventions to increase uptake of peripheral nerve blocks for hip fracture patients will likely need to focus on structures and processes at the hospital and anaesthetist levels.
麻醉实践中的不必要差异与不良结果有关。尽管有高确定性的益处证据,但少数髋部骨折手术患者接受外周神经阻滞。我们的目的是估计医院、麻醉师和患者层面外周神经阻滞使用的差异,同时确定髋部骨折患者使用外周神经阻滞的预测因素。
在方案注册后(https://osf.io/48bvp/),我们使用加拿大安大略省的链接行政数据进行了一项基于人群的横断面研究。我们纳入了 2012 年 4 月 1 日至 2018 年 3 月 31 日接受急诊髋部骨折手术的年龄>65 岁的成年人。使用逻辑混合模型估计外周神经阻滞使用的差异归因于医院、麻醉师和患者层面的因素,使用方差分解系数和中位数优势比来量化。估计了外周神经阻滞使用的预测因素,并进行了时间验证。
在 50950 名患者中,9144 名(18.5%)在手术 1 天内接受了外周神经阻滞。患者层面的因素占差异的 14%,而 42%和 44%分别归因于提供护理的医院和麻醉师。接受外周神经阻滞的中位数优势比在医院层面为 5.73,在麻醉师层面为 5.97。没有患者因素与接受外周神经阻滞有很大关联(优势比在 5%水平有意义的范围为 0.86 至 1.35)。
患者因素对外周神经阻滞在髋部骨折手术中的使用差异解释最小。增加髋部骨折患者接受外周神经阻滞的干预措施可能需要侧重于医院和麻醉师层面的结构和流程。