Show simple item record

Files in this item


Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorJohansen, Antony
dc.contributor.authorHall, Andrew J
dc.contributor.authorOjeda-Thies, Cristina
dc.contributor.authorPoacher, Arwel T
dc.contributor.authorCosta, Matthew L
dc.contributor.authorGlobal Fragility Fracture Network Hip Fracture Audit Special Interest Group
dc.identifier.citationJohansen , A , Hall , A J , Ojeda-Thies , C , Poacher , A T , Costa , M L & Global Fragility Fracture Network Hip Fracture Audit Special Interest Group 2023 , ' Standardization of global hip fracture audit could facilitate learning, improve quality, and guide evidence-based practice ' , The Bone & Joint Journal , vol. 105-B , no. 9 , pp. 1013-1019 .
dc.identifier.otherJisc: 1337998
dc.identifier.otherpii: BJJ-2023-0281
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-4582-8368/work/142499071
dc.description.abstractNational hip fracture registries audit similar aspects of care but there is variation in the actual data collected; these differences restrict international comparison, benchmarking, and research. The Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) published a revised minimum common dataset (MCD) in 2022 to improve consistency and interoperability. Our aim was to assess compatibility of existing registries with the MCD. We compared 17 hip fracture registries covering 20 countries (Argentina; Australia and New Zealand; China; Denmark; England, Wales, and Northern Ireland; Germany; Holland; Ireland; Japan; Mexico; Norway; Pakistan; the Philippines; Scotland; South Korea; Spain; and Sweden), setting each of these against the 20 core and 12 optional fields of the MCD. The highest MCD adherence was demonstrated by the most recently established registries. The first-generation registries in Scandinavia collect data for 60% of MCD fields, second-generation registries (UK, other European, and Australia and New Zealand) collect for 75%, and third-generation registries collect data for 85% of MCD fields. Five of the 20 core fields were collected by all 17 registries (age; sex; surgery date/time of operation; surgery type; and death during acute admission). Two fields were collected by most (16/17; 94%) registries (date/time of presentation and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade), and five more by the majority (15/17; 88%) registries (type, side, and pathological nature of fracture; anaesthetic modality; and discharge destination). Three core fields were each collected by only 11/17 (65%) registries: prefracture mobility/activities of daily living; cognition on admission; and bone protection medication prescription. There is moderate but improving compatibility between existing registries and the FFN MCD, and its introduction in 2022 was associated with an improved level of adherence among the most recently established programmes. Greater interoperability could be facilitated by improving consistency of data collection relating to prefracture function, cognition, bone protection, and follow-up duration, and this could improve international collaborative benchmarking, research, and quality improvement.
dc.relation.ispartofThe Bone & Joint Journalen
dc.subjectActivities of Daily Livingen
dc.subjectHip Fractures - epidemiology - surgeryen
dc.subjectReference Standardsen
dc.subjectEvidence-Based Practiceen
dc.titleStandardization of global hip fracture audit could facilitate learning, improve quality, and guide evidence-based practiceen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Medicineen
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record