• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

髋部骨折患者的医院间转运与更高的成本和死亡率相关。

Hospital Transfers for Hip Fracture Patients Are Associated With Higher Cost and Mortality.

作者信息

Hutchison Catherine E T, Rollier Genevieve, Li Hsin-Fang, Wells Erica, Workman Kimberly L, Duwelius Paul J, Lieberman Elizabeth G

机构信息

Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Portland, Oregon.

Providence St. Joseph Health, Surgery & Orthopedic Program, Portland, Oregon.

出版信息

J Arthroplasty. 2025 Aug;40(8S1):S62-S67. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.035. Epub 2025 Mar 17.

DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.035
PMID:40107576
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transferring hip fracture patients may increase morbidity and cost. The purpose of this study was to examine time to surgery, outcomes, and cost in patients undergoing operative management of displaced femoral neck fractures (DFNFs), comparing those admitted through the emergency department (ED) and those transferred from outside hospitals.

METHODS

A retrospective review of surgically managed DFNF patients (age ≥ 65 years) at a single institution between May 29, 2020, and December 29, 2022, was performed. Patients were categorized into two groups: "ED arrivals" and "transfers." Demographics, time from presentation to surgery, hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, 1-year readmission, reoperation, and mortality, and total cost of care were collected and compared. We identified 459 patients (ED = 422, 92.0%, Transfer = 37, 8.0%). There was no difference in age, sex, body mass index, or American Society of Anesthesiologists status.

RESULTS

Median time from ED to operating room was higher in the transfer group (41.6 versus 23.2 hours, P < 0.0001). Transfer and ED patients had similar length of stay (5.9 versus 6.0 days, P = 0.29) and similar rates of discharge to skilled nursing facility (66.1 versus 62.2%, P = 0.39). There was a higher rate of 1-year mortality (27.0 versus 13.5% for ED, P = 0.03) in transfer patients but no difference in 1-year readmission or reoperation. Adjusting for demographics, transfer patients had 2.6 higher odds of 1-year mortality than ED patients (odds ratio = 2.59 (1.13 to 5.94) P = 0.03). The cost of care was higher for transfer patients ($23,521 versus $13,980, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Transferring DFNF patients was associated with delayed time to surgery, increased 1-year mortality, and higher costs. Transferring patients is a logistical reality for many conditions; however, efforts should be made to provide efficient, safe, and cost-effective care.

摘要

背景

转运髋部骨折患者可能会增加发病率和成本。本研究的目的是检查移位型股骨颈骨折(DFNF)手术治疗患者的手术时间、结局和成本,比较通过急诊科(ED)入院的患者和从外部医院转运来的患者。

方法

对2020年5月29日至2022年12月29日期间在单一机构接受手术治疗的DFNF患者(年龄≥65岁)进行回顾性研究。患者分为两组:“急诊入院患者”和“转运患者”。收集并比较人口统计学数据、从就诊到手术的时间、住院时间、出院处置情况、1年再入院率、再次手术率和死亡率以及总护理成本。我们确定了459例患者(急诊入院 = 422例,占92.0%;转运 = 37例,占8.0%)。在年龄、性别、体重指数或美国麻醉医师协会分级方面没有差异。

结果

转运组从急诊到手术室的中位时间更长(41.6小时对23.2小时,P < 0.0001)。转运患者和急诊入院患者的住院时间相似(5.9天对6.0天,P = 0.29),转至专业护理机构的出院率也相似(66.1%对62.2%,P = 0.39)。转运患者的1年死亡率较高(急诊入院患者为13.5%,转运患者为27.0%,P = 0.03),但1年再入院率或再次手术率没有差异。在对人口统计学因素进行调整后,转运患者1年死亡的几率比急诊入院患者高2.6倍(优势比 = 2.59(1.13至5.94),P = 0.03)。转运患者的护理成本更高(23,521美元对13,980美元,P < 0.0001)。

结论

转运DFNF患者与手术时间延迟、1年死亡率增加和成本更高有关。对于许多情况来说,转运患者是一个后勤现实问题;然而,应努力提供高效、安全且具有成本效益的护理。

相似文献

1
Hospital Transfers for Hip Fracture Patients Are Associated With Higher Cost and Mortality.髋部骨折患者的医院间转运与更高的成本和死亡率相关。
J Arthroplasty. 2025 Aug;40(8S1):S62-S67. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.035. Epub 2025 Mar 17.
2
Are There Differences in Performance Among Femoral Stem Brands Utilized in Cementless Hemiarthroplasty for Treatment of Geriatric Femoral Neck Fractures?在用于治疗老年股骨颈骨折的非骨水泥半髋关节置换术中,不同品牌的股骨柄在性能上是否存在差异?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Feb 1;483(2):253-264. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003222. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
3
Surgical approaches for inserting hemiarthroplasty of the hip in people with hip fractures.髋部骨折患者行半髋关节置换术的手术入路
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jun 13;6(6):CD016031. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD016031.
4
Is a Rapid Recovery Protocol for THA and TKA Associated With Decreased 90-day Complications, Opioid Use, and Readmissions in a Health Safety-net Hospital?THA 和 TKA 的快速康复方案是否与降低卫生保障医院 90 天内并发症、阿片类药物使用和再入院率有关?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Aug 1;482(8):1442-1451. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003054. Epub 2024 Apr 2.
5
High Risk of Readmission After THA Regardless of Functional Status in Patients Discharged to Skilled Nursing Facility.入住专业护理机构的患者,无论功能状态如何,全髋关节置换术后再入院风险均高。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Jul 1;482(7):1185-1192. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002950. Epub 2024 Jan 16.
6
Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures.老年人髋部骨折的多学科康复。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Nov 12;11(11):CD007125. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007125.pub3.
7
What Factors Are Associated With Implant Revision in the Treatment of Pathologic Subtrochanteric Femur Fractures?在病理性股骨转子下骨折的治疗中,哪些因素与植入物翻修相关?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Mar 1;483(3):473-484. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003291. Epub 2024 Oct 22.
8
Surgical interventions for treating intracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis.老年人囊内型髋部骨折的手术治疗:网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 14;2(2):CD013404. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013404.pub2.
9
Contralateral THAs More Than 1 Year Apart: Do PROMs and Healthcare Utilization Differ After Each Procedure?间隔超过1年的对侧全髋关节置换术:每次手术后患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)和医疗资源利用情况是否存在差异?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 May 1;483(5):832-842. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003339. Epub 2024 Dec 6.
10
Surgical interventions for treating extracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis.老年人髋关节囊外骨折的手术干预:一项网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 10;2(2):CD013405. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013405.pub2.