Hip fracture management in the emergency department and its impact on hospital outcomes: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

PURPOSE: The emergency department (ED) plays an important role in initiating early treatment for hip fractures and ensuring prompt transfer to orthopaedic wards. This study reported on the care delivered in a tertiary centre ED in Malaysia and the association between time spent in ED with hospital outcomes. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 65 years with fragility hip fractures and seen by the geriatric team were recruited. Data were collected on patient characteristics, key time points for treatment and hospital outcomes. Median time in ED was used to dichotomise long and short waiting time. RESULTS: 447 patients were recruited. The mean (SD) age was 80.5 (7.0) years and 69.8% were women. 74.9% were prescribed analgesia within 30 min. Median (Q1,Q3) time to diagnostic imaging was 27.0 (24.0-43.0) minutes, clinician confirmation of fracture was 83.0 (49.0-129.0) minutes, and time in ED was 4.8 (3.5-6.9) h. A weekday, weekend, in-hour or out-of-hour admission did not demonstrate a difference in the time important care was delivered. Patients who spent ≥ 5 h in ED had more cardiac events (4.6 vs 10.1%, p = 0.023) and more spent ≥ 14 days in hospital (17.5 vs 29.0%, p = 0.004) compared to those < 5 h. No significant increase in inpatient complications (43.5 vs 34.6%, p = 0.054), length of stay (median, 8 vs 7 days, p = 0.119), care home discharge (5.3 vs 4.6%, p = 0.772), or in-hospital death (6.3 vs 4.2%, p = 0.313) were observed. CONCLUSION: Time to early hip fracture pain relief and diagnosis was adequate in this ED. Time ≥ 5 h in ED was associated with cardiac events and 2 weeks or more inpatient stay.

Screening and management of osteoporosis: a survey of knowledge, attitude and practice among primary care physicians in Malaysia.

We surveyed primary care physicians in Malaysia for their knowledge, attitude and practice in screening and managing osteoporosis. We found a low level of screening and active management of osteoporosis in the primary care setting despite positive attitudes towards them. We advocate for the active management of osteoporosis at the primary care level. INTRODUCTION: Prevention of osteoporotic fracture is important in primary healthcare for healthy ageing. Little is known about the knowledge, attitude, practice and barriers in the screening and managing osteoporosis among primary care doctors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, using an online pre-tested questionnaire after face and content validation, was conducted for primary care doctors from 1 June to 30 July 2021 across Malaysia. Pearson's chi-square test and logistic regression were employed. RESULTS: A total of 350 primary care doctors in Malaysia, consisting of 113 (32.3%) family medicine specialists (FMS) and 237 (67.7%) medical officers, participated in this study. The mean ± SD score of osteoporosis knowledge was 50.46 ± 15.09 with minimum and maximum values of 0 and 83.64%, respectively. One hundred and ten (31.4%) respondents achieved a satisfactory overall knowledge score of ≥ 60%, 156 (44.6%) were confident in advising patients for initiation of anti-osteoporotic medication, and 243 (69.4%) perceived that bisphosphonate should be made available in health clinics. Only 97 (27.7%) practised osteoporosis screening. Inaccessibility of bone mineral densitometry (BMD) (90.6%), inadequate knowledge (87.7%) and inaccessibility of pharmacotherapy (87.1%) are perceived modifiable barriers to osteoporosis screening and management. Factors associated with a satisfactory knowledge of osteoporosis are designation as a family medicine specialist (AOR 3.034, p = 0.002), attendance at an osteoporosis management update course (AOR 2.095, p = 0.034) and the practice of osteoporosis screening for the elderly (AOR 2.767, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Given the insufficient knowledge and low level of osteoporosis screening, there is a need for a national structured health programme to address the knowledge gap, increase screening practices and enhance accessibility to BMD and anti-osteoporosis medication in primary care.

Non-pharmacological interventions for bone health after stroke: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness and safety of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce bone loss among post-stroke adult patients. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, Scopus, PubMed and PeDRO databases were searched from inception up to 31st August 2021. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials, experimental studies without randomization and prospective cohort studies with concurrent control of non-pharmacological interventions for adult stroke patients compared with placebo or other stroke care. The review outcomes were bone loss, fall and fracture. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools were used to assess methodological quality, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations Framework to assess outcome quality. Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) was used for result synthesis. RESULTS: Seven studies (n = 453) were included. The methodological and outcome qualities varied from low to moderate. There were statistically significant changes between the intervention and parallel/placebo group in bone mineral density, bone mineral content, cortical thickness and bone turnover markers with specific physical and vibration therapies (p<0.05). Falls were higher in the intervention group, but no fracture was reported. CONCLUSION: There was low to moderate evidence that physical and vibration therapies significantly reduced bone loss in post-stroke patients at the expense of a higher falls rate. The sample size was small, and the interventions were highly heterogeneous with different duration, intensities and frequencies. Despite osteoporosis occurring with ageing and accelerated by stroke, there were no studies on vitamin D or protein supplementation to curb the ongoing loss. Effective, high-quality non-pharmacological intervention to improve post-stroke bone health is required.

COVID-19 Infection among Older People Admitted to Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

(1) Background: Older people with COVID-19 infection report worse clinical outcomes. There is a paucity of local data and this study aimed to describe the clinical progression of older people admitted to a university hospital in Malaysia with COVID-19 infection. (2) Methods: Older people (≥60 years) admitted with COVID-19 infection confirmed with RT-PCR from 27 February 2020-25 May 2020 were included in this study. Data on patient characteristics, hospital treatment, and inpatient outcomes were collected via hospital-held electronic medical records. Analysis was done to describe the cohort and identify factors associated with inpatient mortality. (3) Results: 26 participants were included (mean age 76.2 years, female 57.7%). All had at least one comorbid condition and half were frail. About 19.2% had non-respiratory (atypical) symptoms; 23.1% had a severe disease that required intensive care unit monitoring; 46.2% were given COVID-19 targeted therapy. Inpatient mortality and overall complication rates were 23.1% and 42.3%, respectively. Delirium on presentation and lower Ct-value were associated with mortality. (4) Conclusions: Older people with COVID-19 infection have severe infection and poor hospital outcomes. Vigilant hospital care is necessary to address their multimorbidity and frailty, along with appropriate treatment for their infection.