Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical care in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruption of regular healthcare leading to reduced hospital attendances, repurposing of surgical facilities, and cancellation of cancer screening programmes. This study aimed to determine the impact of COVID-19 on surgical care in the Netherlands. METHODS: A nationwide study was conducted in collaboration with the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. Eight surgical audits were expanded with items regarding alterations in scheduling and treatment plans. Data on procedures performed in 2020 were compared with those from a historical cohort (2018-2019). Endpoints included total numbers of procedures performed and altered treatment plans. Secondary endpoints included complication, readmission, and mortality rates. RESULTS: Some 12 154 procedures were performed in participating hospitals in 2020, representing a decrease of 13.6 per cent compared with 2018-2019. The largest reduction (29.2 per cent) was for non-cancer procedures during the first COVID-19 wave. Surgical treatment was postponed for 9.6 per cent of patients. Alterations in surgical treatment plans were observed in 1.7 per cent. Time from diagnosis to surgery decreased (to 28 days in 2020, from 34 days in 2019 and 36 days in 2018; P < 0.001). For cancer-related procedures, duration of hospital stay decreased (5 versus 6 days; P < 0.001). Audit-specific complications, readmission, and mortality rates were unchanged, but ICU admissions decreased (16.5 versus 16.8 per cent; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The reduction in the number of surgical operations was greatest for those without cancer. Where surgery was undertaken, it appeared to be delivered safely, with similar complication and mortality rates, fewer admissions to ICU, and a shorter hospital stay.

COVID-19 has had a significant impact on healthcare worldwide. Hospital visits were reduced, operating facilities were used for COVID-19 care, and cancer screening programmes were cancelled. This study describes the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Dutch surgical healthcare in 2020. Patterns of care in terms of changed or delayed treatment are described for patients who had surgery in 2020, compared with those who had surgery in 2018­2019. The study found that mainly non-cancer surgical treatments were cancelled during months with high COVID-19 rates. Outcomes for patients undergoing surgery were similar but with fewer ICU admissions and shorter hospital stay. These data provide no insight into the burden endured by patients who had postponed or cancelled operations.

Is hospital volume related to quality of hip fracture care? Analysis of 43,538 patients and 68 hospitals from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit.

PURPOSE: Evidence for a hospital volume-outcome relationship in hip fracture surgery is inconclusive. This study aimed to analyze the association between hospital volume as a continuous parameter and several processes and outcomes of hip fracture care. METHODS: Adult patients registered in the nationwide Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA) between 2018 and 2020 were included. The association between annual hospital volume and turnaround times (time on the emergency ward, surgery < 48 h and length of stay), orthogeriatric co-treatment and case-mix adjusted in-hospital and 30 days mortality was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models with random effects for hospital and treatment year. We used a fifth-degree polynomial to allow for nonlinear effects of hospital volume. P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferoni method. RESULTS: In total, 43,258 patients from 68 hospitals were included. The median annual hospital volume was 202 patients [range 1-546]. Baseline characteristics did not differ with hospital volume. Provision of orthogeriatric co-treatment improved with higher volumes but decreased at > 367 patients per year (p < 0.01). Hospital volume was not significantly associated with mortality outcomes. No evident clinical relation between hospital volume and turnaround times was found. CONCLUSION: This is the first study analyzing the effect of hospital volume on hip fracture care, treating volume as a continuous parameter. Mortality and turnaround times showed no clinically relevant association with hospital volume. The provision of orthogeriatric co-treatment, however, increased with increasing volumes up to 367 patients per year, but decreased above this threshold. Future research on the effect of volume on complications and functional outcomes is indicated.

Variation in treatment of hip fractures and guideline adherence amongst surgeons with different training backgrounds in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Two medical specialties, general surgery and orthopaedic surgery, with different training programs but matching trauma certification requirements, provide hip fracture surgery in the Netherlands. This study analyses treatment preferences and guideline adherence of Dutch surgeons with different surgical backgrounds. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All hip fracture patients registered in the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit in 2018 and 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Four types of surgeons were distinguished: trauma-certified general surgeons (ST+), non-trauma certified general surgeons (ST-), trauma-certified orthopaedic surgeons (OT+) and non-trauma certified orthopaedic surgeons (OT-). Differences in patient characteristics, and practice variation in treatment choices and guideline adherence per fracture type were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 28,656 patients were included; 16,367 (57.1%) treated by ST+, 1,371 (4.8%) by ST-, 4,692 (16.4%) by OT+ and 6,226 (21.7%) by OT-. Few clinically relevant differences in patient characteristics and hospital processes were found between all surgeon groups. Displaced FNF were the most commonly treated fracture type for all types of surgeons. Both OT+ and OT- operated mostly (displaced) FNFs, while the fracture types treated by ST+ and ST- were more heterogeneous. For all fracture types, the orthopaedic surgeons performed THA and HA more often than general surgeons, while general surgeons more often placed SHS and IMN for specific fracture types. Guideline adherence was on average 68.4% and differed significantly per surgeon type (68.7% by ST+, 65.2% by ST-, 74.4% by OT+ and 63.6% by OT- (p<0.01)), as well as per fracture type: >90% treatment according to the guideline for trochanteric AO-31A2 and A3 fractures, 18.8% for AO-31A1 fractures and 51.7% guideline adherence for undisplaced FNF. Guideline adherence for displaced FNF varied depending on patient characteristics. DISCUSSION: In the Netherlands, different surgical specialists treat different types of hip fractures and have different preferences concerning implants for hip fracture surgery in comparable patients. Guideline adherence of trauma- and non-trauma certified orthopaedics and general surgeons differs significantly. Reduction of practice variation should be strived for in order to improve hip fracture care.

Data-driven development of the nationwide hip fracture registry in the Netherlands.

Additional variables for a nationwide hip fracture registry must be carefully chosen to prevent unnecessary registry load. A registry pilot in seven hospitals resulted in recommending polypharmacy, serum hemoglobin at admittance, and questions screening for risk of delirium to be used in case-mix correction and for development of quality indicators. PURPOSE: Clinical registries help improve the quality of care but come at the cost of registration load. Datasets should therefore be as compact as possible; however, variables are usually chosen empirically. This study aims to evaluate potential variables with additional value to improve the nationwide Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA). METHODS: An expert panel selected eleven new variables for the DHFA, which were tested in a prospective cohort of all hip fracture patients treated in 2018 and 2019 in seven pilot hospitals participating in the DHFA. The association of these eleven variables with complications, mortality, and functional outcomes at 3 months was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Based on the results, a proposal for variables to add to the dataset of the DHFA was made. RESULTS: In 4.904 analyzed patients, three tested variables had significant associations (p < 0.01) with outcomes: polypharmacy with complications (aOR 1.34), serum hemoglobin at admittance with complications (aOR 0.63) and mortality (aOR for 30-day mortality 0.78), and a set of questions screening for risk of delirium with complications in general (aOR 1.55), e.g., delirium (aOR 2.98), and decreased functional scores at three months (aOR 1.98). CONCLUSION: This study assesses potential new variables for a hip fracture registry. Based on the results of this study, we recommend polypharmacy, serum hemoglobin at admittance, and questions screening for risk of delirium to be used in case-mix correction and for the development of quality indicators. Incorporating these variables in the DHFA dataset may contribute to better and clinically relevant quality indicators.

Development of a data-driven case-mix adjustment model for comparison of hospital performance in hip fracture care.

To compare hospitals' hip fracture patient mortality in a quality of care registry, correction for patient characteristics is needed. This study evaluates in 39,374 patients which characteristics are associated with 30 and 90-day mortality, and showed how using these characteristics in a case mix-model changes hospital comparisons within the Netherlands. PURPOSE: Mortality rates after hip fracture surgery are considerable and may be influenced by patient characteristics. This study aims to evaluate hospital variation regarding patient demographics and disease burden, to develop a case-mix adjustment model to analyse differences in hip fracture patients' mortality to calculate case-mix adjusted hospital-specific mortality rates. METHODS: Data were derived from 64 hospitals participating in the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA). Adult hip fracture patients registered in 2017-2019 were included. Variation of case-mix factors between hospitals was analysed, and the association between case-mix factors and mortality at 30 and 90 days was determined through regression models. RESULTS: There were 39,374 patients included. Significant variation in case-mix factors amongst hospitals was found for age ≥ 80 (range 25.8-72.1% p < 0.001), male gender (12.0-52.9% p < 0.001), nursing home residents (42.0-57.9% p < 0.001), pre-fracture mobility aid use (9.9-86.7% p < 0,001), daily living dependency (27.5-96.5% p < 0,001), ASA-class ≥ 3 (25.8-83.3% p < 0.001), dementia (3.6-28.6% p < 0.001), osteoporosis (0.0-57.1% p < 0.001), risk of malnutrition (0.0-29.2% p < 0.001) and fracture types (all p < 0.001). All factors were associated with 30- and 90-day mortality. Eight hospitals showed higher and six showed lower 30-day mortality than expected based on their case-mix. Six hospitals showed higher and seven lower 90-day mortality than expected. The specific outlier hospitals changed when correcting for case-mix factors. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch hospitals show significant case-mix variation regarding hip fracture patients. Case-mix adjustment is a prerequisite when comparing hospitals' 30-day and 90-day hip fracture patients' mortality. Adjusted mortality may serve as a starting point for improving hip fracture care.

Textbook process as a composite quality indicator for in-hospital hip fracture care.

Individual process indicators often do not enable the benchmarking of hospitals and often lack an association with outcomes of care. The composite hip fracture process indicator, textbook process, might be a tool to detect hospital variation and is associated with better outcomes during hospital stay. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine hospital variation in quality of hip fracture care using a composite process indicator (textbook process) and to evaluate at patient level whether fulfilment of the textbook process indicator was associated with better outcomes during hospital stay. METHODS: Hip fracture patients aged 70 and older operated in five hospitals between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 were included. Textbook process for hip fracture care was defined as follows: (1) assessment of malnutrition (2) surgery within 24 h, (3) orthogeriatric management during admission and (4) operation by an orthopaedic trauma certified surgeon. Hospital variation analysis was done by computing an observed/expected ratio (O/E ratio) for textbook process at hospital level. The expected ratios were derived from a multivariable logistic regression analysis including all relevant case-mix variables. The association between textbook process compliance and in-hospital complications and prolonged hospital stay was determined at patient level in a multivariable logistic regression model, with correction for patient, treatment and hospital characteristics. In-hospital complications were anaemia, delirium, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, in-hospital fall, heart failure, renal insufficiency, pulmonary embolism, wound infection and pressure ulcer. RESULTS: Of the 1371 included patients, 753 (55%) received care according to textbook process. At hospital level, the textbook compliance rates ranged from 38 to 76%. At patient level, textbook process compliance was significantly associated with fewer complications (38% versus 46%) (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.84), but not with hospital stay (median length of hospital stay was 5 days in both groups) (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.78-1.30). CONCLUSION: The textbook process indicator for hip fracture care might be a tool to detect hospital variation. At patient level, this quality indicator is associated with fewer complications during hospital stay.

Clockwise Torque of Sliding Hip Screws: Is There a Right Side?

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether patients with a left-sided femoral neck fracture (FNF) treated with a sliding hip screw (SHS) had a higher implant failure rate than patients treated for a right-sided FNF. This was performed to determine the clinical relevance of the clockwise rotational torque of the femoral neck lag screw in a SHS, in relation to the rotational stability of left and right-sided FNFs after fixation. METHODS: Data were derived from the FAITH trial and Dutch Hip Fracture Audit (DHFA). Patients with a FNF, aged ≥50, treated with a SHS, with at least 3-month follow-up data available, were included. Implant failure was analyzed in a multivariable logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex, fracture displacement, prefracture living setting and functional mobility, and American Society for Anesthesiologists Class. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred fifty patients were included, of which 944 (53.9%) had a left-sided and 806 (46.1%) a right-sided FNF. Implant failure occurred in 60 cases (3.4%), of which 31 were left-sided and 29 right-sided. No association between fracture side and implant failure was found [odds ratio (OR) for left vs. right 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.52]. Female sex (OR 3.02, CI: 1.62-6.10), using a mobility aid (OR 2.02, CI 1.01-3.96) and a displaced fracture (OR 2.51, CI: 1.44-4.42), were associated with implant failure. CONCLUSIONS: This study could not substantiate the hypothesis that the biomechanics of the clockwise screw rotation of the SHS contributes to an increased risk of implant failure in left-sided FNFs compared with right-sided fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II.See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Development and Internal Validation of a Prediction Model for In-Hospital Mortality in Geriatric Patients With a Hip Fracture.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prediction model for in-hospital mortality in patients with hip fracture 85 years of age or older undergoing surgery. DESIGN: A multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six Dutch trauma centers, level 2 and 3. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with hip fracture 85 years of age or older undergoing surgery. INTERVENTION: Hip fracture surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: In-hospital mortality. RESULTS: The development cohort consisted of 1014 patients. In-hospital mortality was 4%. Age, male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and hemoglobin levels at presentation were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. The bootstrap adjusted performance showed good discrimination with a c-statistic of 0.77. CONCLUSION: Age, male sex, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and lower hemoglobin levels at presentation are robust independent predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with geriatric hip fracture and were incorporated in a simple prediction model with good accuracy and no lack of fit. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.