Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Nov 22;15(11):e49234.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.49234. eCollection 2023 Nov.

The Impact of Screening for Perioperative ICU Admission in Geriatric Hip Fracture Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

Affiliations

The Impact of Screening for Perioperative ICU Admission in Geriatric Hip Fracture Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

Charles Fasanya et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Background: Hip fracture patients are a subset of trauma patients with high peri-operative mortality. To mitigate the mortality risk, the use of predictive scoring systems (e.g., RSI or Nomograms) for risk stratification and monitoring of high-risk patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been proposed. Screening patients for ICU admission with relatively low-cost tools may achieve high-quality, low-cost care. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of screening postoperative hip fracture patients for ICU admission.

Methods: This is a retrospective single-site study comparing two groups of patients, before and after implementation of a hip fracture postoperative screening intervention in a level 1 trauma center in the United States. All hip fracture patients > 55 years of age admitted to the hospital between January 2021 and May 2023 were included. Trauma team members assessed and screened patients postoperatively in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), ordering standardized tests, including laboratory tests, a chest x-ray, and electrocardiogram (EKG). Assessment of the effect of the intervention included a comparison of a number of major adverse events (MAEs), mortality, planned and unplanned ICU admissions, ICU length of stay (LOS), and hospital LOS between pre- and post-intervention groups. Propensity score (PS) estimates were used to compare outcomes between the matched participants in the sample. A predictive model for ICU admission for the overall sample was estimated, and discriminative ability was assessed with an area under the curve (AUC) receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis. Lastly, feasibility was assessed by compliance with screening intervention and charges per patient related to the intervention.

Results: The sample consisted of 290 patients in the pre-intervention and 180 patients in the post-intervention groups, respectively, with a mean age of 81.4 ± (9.9) years. There was a significant increase (p<0.01) in planned ICU admissions (OR=2.387, 95% CI (1.430, 3.983)) after screening protocol implementation. There was no significant difference between the pre-intervention group and post-intervention group in the number of MAEs (p=0.392), mortality (p=0.591), ICU LOS (p=0.617), and hospital LOS (p=0.151). When the PS-matched sample (n=424) was analyzed, there was a significant decrease (p=0.45) in unplanned ICU admissions (OR=6.40, 95% CI (0.81, 50.95)) after protocol implementation. Anticoagulants, emergency department (ED) respiratory rate (RR), injury severity score (ISS), number of comorbidities, substance use disorder (SAD), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were significant predictors of ICU admission (p=0.002, 0.022, 0.030, 0.034, 0.039, 0.039, and 0.042), respectively, and, demonstrated the discriminative ability between high and low risk for ICU admission (AUC=0.597, 0.587, 0.581, 0.578, 0.513, and 0.587, respectively). The screening intervention was achievable with 99% compliance (Kappa estimate 0.94) among trauma team members with an average charge of $282 per patient.

Conclusion: The addition of a postoperative screening intervention for hip fracture patients > 55 years of age is achievable and decreases unplanned ICU admissions in matched samples. Presenting clinical indicators and comorbidities are associated with ICU admission and provide sufficient discriminatory ability as criteria for ICU admission.

Keywords: hip fractures; intensive care unit; propensity score; risk factors; screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Propensity score-matched sample (n=424)
Figure 2
Figure 2. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of ICU admission
a Risk factors in panels 1 and 2 have a positive relationship with the probability of ICU admission. b There is at least one tie between positive and negative state groups.

References

    1. Epidemiology of fragility fractures. Friedman SM, Mendelson DA. Clin Geriatr Med. 2014;30:175–181. - PubMed
    1. Hip fracture evaluation and management. Nandi S, Dougherty P, Gruen G, Ebraheim N. Adv Orthop. 2019;2019:2717518. - PMC - PubMed
    1. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. Johnell O, Kanis JA. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15:897–902. - PubMed
    1. Elderly adults with isolated hip fractures- orthogeriatric care versus standard care: a practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma. Mukherjee K, Brooks SE, Barraco RD, Como JJ, Hwang F, Robinson BR, Crandall ML. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;88:266–278. - PubMed
    1. How deadly is a fracture distal to the hip in the elderly? An observational cohort study of 11,799 femoral fractures in the Swedish Fracture Register. Wolf O, Mukka S, Ekelund J, Möller M, Hailer NP. Acta Orthop. 2021;92:40–46. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources