Evaluation of Systemwide Improvement Programs to Optimize Time to Surgery for Patients With Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Longer time to surgery (TTS) for hip fractures has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and mortality. Given that more than 300 000 adults are hospitalized for hip fractures in the United States each year, various improvement programs have been implemented to reduce TTS with variable results, attributed to contextual patient- and system-level factors. Objective: To catalog TTS improvement programs, identify their results, and categorize program strategies according to Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), highlighting components of successful improvement programs within their associated contexts and seeking to guide health care systems in implementing programs designed to reduce TTS. Evidence Review: A systematic review was conducted per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Three databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Trials) were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2021 that reported on improvement programs for hip fracture TTS. Observational studies in high-income country settings, including patients with surgical, low-impact, nonpathological hip fractures aged 50 years or older, were considered for review. Improvement programs were assessed for their association with decreased TTS, and ERIC strategies were matched to improvement program components. Findings: Preliminary literature searches yielded 1683 articles, of which 69 articles were included for final analysis. Among the 69 improvement programs, 49 were associated with significantly decreased TTS, and 20 programs did not report significant decreases in TTS. Among 49 successful improvement programs, the 5 most common ERIC strategies were (1) assess for readiness and identify barriers and facilitators, (2) develop a formal implementation blueprint, (3) identify and prepare champions, (4) promote network weaving, and (5) develop resource-sharing agreements. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, certain components (eg, identifying barriers and facilitators to program implementation, developing a formal implementation blueprint, preparing intervention champions) are common among improvement programs that were associated with reducing TTS and may inform the approach of hospital systems developing similar programs. Other strategies had mixed results, suggesting local contextual factors (eg, operating room availability) may affect their success. To contextualize the success of a given improvement program across different clinical settings, subsequent investigation must elucidate the association between interventional success and facility-level factors influencing TTS, such as hospital census and type, teaching status, annual surgical volume, and other factors.

There is poor accuracy in documenting the location of labral and chondral lesions observed during hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: To determine and compare the accuracy and interobserver reliability of the different methods for localizing acetabular labral, acetabular chondral, and femoral head chondral lesions with hip arthroscopy . METHODS: Three cadaver hips were placed in the supine position. Three labral, three femoral chondral, and six acetabular chondral lesions were made in each cadaver using electrocautery. Six surgeons classified the lesions according to different classification systems (clock-face, geographic, Method-G) using hip arthroscopy and standardized portals. Identification of each lesion was performed after conclusion of the study through open dissection and surgical hip dislocation to be used as the "gold-standard." Accuracy was calculated as the number of correct answers divided by total number of responses for a given system. The interobserver reliability was calculated using the kappa coefficient. The different classification methods were compared. All P values were reported with significance set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: The clock-face method had an accuracy of 74% (95% CI, 60%-85%) and interobserver reliability of 0.19 (95% CI, 0.11-0.26) while the geographic method had an accuracy of 50% (95% CI, 36%-64%) and interobserver reliability of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.05-0.31) for acetabular labral lesion identification (P > 0.05). The acetabular chondral lesion identification accuracy was 56% (95% CI, 46%-65%) for Method G, 66% (95% CI, 56%-75%) for Method G-simp, and 63% (95% CI, 53%-72%) for the geographic system (P > 0.05) with an interobserver reliability of 0.31 (95% CI, 0.27-0.35), 0.34 (95% CI, 0.28-0.40), and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.34-0.45), respectively (P > 0.05). Femoral chondral lesion identification accuracy was 74% (95% CI, 60%-85%) for Method G, 43% (95% CI, 29%-57%) for the geographic method, and 59% (95% CI, 45%-72%) for the geographic-simp system with interobserver reliability of 0.37 (95% CI, 0.27-0.47), 0.34 (95% CI, 0.28-0.40), and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.29-0.51), respectively (P > 0.05). Method G was significantly more accurate than the geographic system (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was poor to fair accuracy and interobserver reliability of the reporting systems for localization of labral, acetabular chondral, and femoral chondral lesions encountered during hip arthroscopy. The study suggests there is a need for a new method that is easy to use, reliable, reproducible and accurate.

The Usability and Feasibility of Conjoint Analysis to Elicit Preferences for Distal Radius Fractures in Patients 55 Years and Older.

PURPOSE: Eliciting patient preferences is one part of the shared decision-making process-a process of decision making focused on the values and preferences of the patient. We evaluated the usability and feasibility of a point-of-care conjoint analysis tool for preference elicitation for shared decision making in the treatment of distal radius fractures in patients over the age of 55 years. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients 55 years of age or older with a displaced distal radius fracture were recruited from a hand and upper extremity clinic. A conjoint analysis tool was created describing the attributes of care (eg, return of grip strength) of surgical and nonsurgical treatment. This tool was administered to patients to determine their preferences for the treatment attributes when choosing between surgical and nonsurgical treatment. Patients completed a System Usability Scale (SUS) to evaluate usability, and time to complete the tool was measured to evaluate feasibility. RESULTS: Patients considered the conjoint analysis tool to be usable (SUS, 91.4; SD, 10.9). Mean time to complete the tool was 5.1 minutes (SD, 1.4 minutes). The most important attributes driving the decision for surgical treatment were return of grip strength at 1 year and time spent in a cast or brace. The most important attributes driving the decision for nonsurgical treatment were use of anesthesia during treatment and return of grip strength at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: A point-of-care conjoint analysis tool for distal radius fractures in patients 55 years and older can be used to elicit patient preferences to inform the shared decision-making process. Further investigation evaluating the effect of preference elicitation on treatment choice, involvement in decision making, and patient-reported outcomes are needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A conjoint analysis tool is a simple, structured process physicians can use during shared decision making to highlight trade-offs between treatment options and elicit patient preferences to inform treatment choices.

Prevalence of alcohol misuse among men and women undergoing major noncardiac surgery in the Veterans Affairs health care system.

BACKGROUND: Patients who screen positive for alcohol misuse on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test Consumption Questionnaire (AUDIT-C ≥5 points) have significantly increased postoperative complications. Severe alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C ≥9 points) is associated with increased postoperative health care use; however, little is known about the prevalence of alcohol misuse in demographic and clinical subgroups of surgical patients. METHODS: The prevalence of alcohol misuse was evaluated among 10,284 patients (9,771 men and 513 women) who underwent major noncardiac surgery in Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals during the fiscal years 2004 to 2006 and completed the AUDIT-C. Sex-stratified analyses evaluated prevalence rates of alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C ≥5) and severe misuse (AUDIT-C ≥9) across demographic and clinical subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, 1,607 (16%) men and 24 (5%) women screened positive for alcohol misuse (AUDIT-C ≥5) in the year before operation, with 4% and 2% screening positive for severe misuse (AUDIT-C ≥9), respectively. Alcohol misuse was more common among men who were <60 years of age, divorced or separated, current smokers, or American Stoke Association class 1 or 2, and those with cirrhosis/hepatitis or substance use disorders. Among patients with alcohol misuse, 36% of men and 58% of women were American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1 or 2, and most did not have diagnoses that were commonly associated with alcohol misuse. CONCLUSION: Alcohol misuse is relatively common in male surgical patients. Moreover, surgical patients undergoing operation who screen positive for alcohol misuse are often relatively healthy, without health problems that might alert providers to their alcohol misuse in the absence of screening.