Receiving home care forms and the risk for emergency department visits in community-dwelling Dutch older adults, a retrospective cohort study using national data.

BACKGROUND: Older adults receiving home care have a higher risk of visiting the emergency department (ED) than community-dwelling older adults not receiving home care. This may result from a higher incidence of comorbidities and reduced functional autonomy in home care recipients. Since people receive different types of home care because of their different comorbidities and autonomy profiles, it is possible that distinguishing between the form of home care can help identify subpopulations with different risks for ED visits and help develop targeted interventions. This study aimed to compare the risk of visiting the ED in older adults receiving different forms of home care with those living at home without receiving home care in a national cohort in one year. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using claims data collected in 2019 on the Dutch population aged ≥ 65 years (N = 3,314,440) was conducted. Participants were classified as follows: no claimed home care (NO), household help (HH), personal care (PC), HH + PC, and nursing home care at home (NHH). The primary outcome was the number of individuals that visited the ED. Secondary outcomes were the number of individuals whose home care changed, who were institutionalized, or who died. Exploratory logistic regression was applied. RESULTS: There were 2,758,093 adults in the NO group, 131,260 in the HH group, 154,462 in the PC group, 96,526 in the HH + PC group, and 34,612 in the NHH group. More ED visits were observed in the home care groups than in the NO group, and this risk increased to more than two-fold for the PC groups. There was a significant change to a more intensive form of home care, institutionalization, or death in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Distinguishing between the form of home care older adults receive identifies subpopulations with different risks for ED visits compared with community-dwelling older adults not receiving home care on a population level. Home care transitions are frequent and mostly involve more intensive care or death. Although older adults not receiving home care have a lower risk of ED visits, they contribute most to the absolute volume of ED visits.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Nonoperatively Managed Patients With Hip Fracture Using the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and compare characteristics of patients with hip fracture treated nonoperatively versus those treated operatively. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Hip fracture population-based study. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: All adult patients with hip fractures (OTA/AO 31A and 31B) were included. Patients with pathological or periprosthetic hip fractures were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Patients were categorized according to the type of management (operative vs. nonoperative) and type of fracture (nondisplaced vs. other). Patient and fracture characteristics associated with nonoperative management (NOM) were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 94,930 patients with hip fracture were included. Of these, 3.2% were treated nonoperatively. Patients receiving NOM were older [86 years (interquartile range, 79-91 years) vs. 81 years (interquartile range, 72-87 years); P < 0.001], more frequently institutionalized (42.4% vs. 17.6%), and were more dependent in activities of daily living (22.2% vs. 55.0%). Various clinical characteristics, including dementia [odds ratio (OR) 1.31 (95% confidence interval, CI, 1.18-1.45) P < 0.001], no functional mobility [OR 4.39 (95% CI, 3.14-3.68) P < 0.001], and activities of daily living (ADL) measured as KATZ-6-ADL [OR 1.17 (95% CI, 1.14-1.20) P < 0.001] were independently associated with NOM. Seven-day mortality was 37.6%, and 30-day mortality was 57.1% in patients treated nonoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The first step in understanding patients who potentially benefit from NOM is evaluating the current standard of care. This study provides insight into the current hip fracture population treated nonoperatively. These patients are older, have higher percentage of dementia, more dependent, and show higher short-term mortality rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Investigating the Effectiveness of Care Delivery at an Acute Geriatric Community Hospital for Older Adults in the Netherlands: A Prospective Controlled Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital admission in older adults is associated with unwanted outcomes such as readmission, institutionalization, and functional decline. To reduce these outcomes, the Netherlands introduced an alternative to hospital-based care: the Acute Geriatric Community Hospital (AGCH). The AGCH is an acute care unit situated outside of a hospital focusing on early rehabilitation and comprehensive geriatric assessment. The objective of this study was to evaluate if AGCH care is associated with decreasing unplanned readmissions or death compared with hospital-based care. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study controlled with a historic cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A (sub)acute care unit (AGCH) and 6 hospitals in the Netherlands; participants were acutely ill older adults. METHODS: We used inverse propensity score weighting to account for baseline differences. The primary outcome was 90-day readmission or death. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission or death, time to death, admission to long-term residential care, occurrence of falls and functioning over time. Generalized logistic regression models and multilevel regression analyses were used to estimate effects. RESULTS: AGCH patients (n = 206) had lower 90-day readmission or death rates [odds ratio (OR) 0.39, 95% CI 0.23-0.67] compared to patients treated in hospital (n = 401). AGCH patients had a lower risk of 90-day readmission (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.67) but did not differ on all-cause mortality (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44-1.79) compared with the hospital control group. AGCH patients had lower 30-day readmission or death rates. Secondary outcomes did not differ. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: AGCH patients had lower rates of readmission and/or death than patients treated in a hospital. Our results support further research on the implementation and cost-effectiveness of AGCH in the Netherlands and other countries seeking alternatives to hospital-based care.

The "Can Do, Do Do" Framework Applied to Assess the Association between Physical Capacity, Physical Activity and Prospective Falls, Subsequent Fractures, and Mortality in Patients Visiting the Fracture Liaison Service.

The "can do, do do" framework combines measures of poor and normal physical capacity (PC, measured by a 6 min walking test, can do/can't do) and physical activity (PA, measured by accelerometer, do do/don't do) into four domains and is able to categorize patient subgroups with distinct clinical characteristics, including fall and fracture risk factors. This study aims to explore the association between domain categorization and prospective fall, fracture, and mortality outcomes. This 6-year prospective study included patients visiting a Fracture Liaison Service with a recent fracture. Outcomes were first fall (at 3 years of follow-up, measured by fall diaries), first subsequent fracture, and mortality (at 6 years). Cumulative incidences of all three outcomes were calculated. The association between domain categorization and time to the three outcomes was assessed by uni- and multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis with the "can do, do do" group as reference. The physical performance of 400 patients with a recent fracture was assessed (mean age: 64 years; 70.8% female), of whom 61.5%, 20.3%, and 4.9% sustained a first fall, sustained a subsequent fracture, or had died. Domain categorization using the "can do, do do" framework was not associated with time to first fall, subsequent fracture, or mortality in the multivariate Cox regression analysis for all groups. "Can't do, don't do" group: hazard ratio [HR] for first fall: 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-1.23), first fracture HR: 0.58 (95% CI: 0.24-1.41), and mortality HR: 1.19 (95% CI: 0.54-6.95). Categorizing patients into a two-dimensional framework seems inadequate to study complex, multifactorial outcomes. A personalized approach based on known fall and fracture risk factors might be preferable.

Does regional implementation of a clinical pathway for older adult patients with pelvic fragility fractures after low-energy trauma improve patient outcomes (PELVIC): a multicentre, stepped-wedge, randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with pelvic fragility fractures suffer from high morbidity and mortality rates. Despite the high incidence, there is currently no regional or nationwide treatment protocol which results in a wide variety of clinical practices. Recently, there have been new insights into treatment strategies, such as early diagnosis and minimally invasive operative treatment. The aim of this study is to implement an evidence-based and experience-based treatment clinical pathway to improve outcomes in this fragile patient population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be a regional stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. All older adult patients (≥50 years old) who suffered a pelvic fragility fracture after low-energetic trauma are eligible for inclusion. The pathway aims to optimise the diagnostic process, to guide the decision-making process for further treatment (eg, operative or conservative), to structure the follow-up and to provide guidelines on pain management, weight-bearing and osteoporosis workup. The primary outcome is mobility, measured by the Parker Mobility Score. Secondary outcomes are mobility measured by the Elderly Mobility Scale, functional performance, quality of life, return to home rate, level of pain, type and dosage of analgesic medications, the number of falls after treatment, the number of (fracture-related) complications, 1-year and 2-year mortality. Every 6 weeks, a cluster will switch from current practice to the clinical pathway. The aim is a total of 393 inclusions, which provides an 80% statistical power for an improvement in mobility of 10%, measured by the Parker mobility score. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Medical Research Ethics Committee of Academic Medical Center has exempted the PELVIC study from the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO). Informed consent will be obtained using the opt-out method and research data will be stored in a database and handled confidentially. The final study report will be shared via publication without restrictions from funding parties and regardless of the outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06054165. PROTOCOL VERSION: V.1.0, 19 July 2022.

The value of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail institutionalized elderly with a hip fracture; a secondary analysis of the FRAIL-HIP study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of (preoperative and geriatric) diagnostic testing, abnormal diagnostic tests and their subsequent interventions, and clinical relevance in frail older adults with a hip fracture. METHODS: Data on clinical consultations, radiological, laboratory, and microbiological diagnostics were extracted from the medical files of all patients included in the FRAIL-HIP study (inclusion criteria: hip fracture, > 70 years, living in a nursing home with malnourishment/cachexia and/or impaired mobility and/or severe co-morbidity). Data were evaluated until hospital discharge in nonoperatively treated patients and until surgery in operatively treated patients. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients (88 nonoperative and 84 operative) were included, of whom 156 (91%) underwent laboratory diagnostics, 126 (73%) chest X-rays, and 23 (13%) CT-scans. In 153/156 (98%) patients at least one abnormal result was found in laboratory diagnostics. In 82/153 (50%) patients this did not result in any additional diagnostics or (pharmacological) intervention. Abnormal test results were mentioned as one of the deciding arguments for operative delay (> 24 h) for 10/84 (12%) patients and as a factor in the decision between nonoperative and operative treatment in 7/172 (4%) patients. CONCLUSION: A large number and variety of diagnostics were performed in this patient population. Abnormal test results in laboratory diagnostics were found for almost all patients and, in majority, appear to have no direct clinical consequences. To prevent unnecessary diagnostics, prospective research is required to evaluate the clinical consequences and added value of the separate elements of preoperative diagnostic testing and geriatric assessment in frail hip fracture patients.

Shared decision-making for non-operative management versus operative management of hip fractures in selected frail older adults with a limited life expectancy: a protocol for a nationwide implementation study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent research has highlighted non-operative management (NOM) as a viable alternative for frail older adults with hip fractures in the final phase of life. This study aims to guide Dutch physicians and hospitals nationwide in a standardised implementation of shared decision-making regarding surgery or NOM in selected frail older adults with a hip fracture. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The patient population for implementation includes frail older adults aged ≥70 years with an acute proximal femoral fracture, nursing home care or a similar level of care elsewhere and at least one additional criterion (ie, malnutrition, severe mobility impairment or ASA≥4). The 2-year implementation study will be conducted in four phases. In phases 1 and 2, barriers and facilitators for implementation will be identified and an implementation protocol, educational materials and patient information will be developed. Phase 3 will involve an implementation pilot in 14 hospitals across the Netherlands. The protocol and educational material will be improved based on healthcare provider and patient experiences gathered through interviews. Phase 4 will focus on upscaling to nationwide implementation and the effect of the implementation on NOM rate will be measured using data from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was exempted by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee (MEC-2023-0270, 10 May 2023) and Medical Ethics Committee United (W23.083, 26 April 2023). The study's results will be submitted to an open access international peer-reviewed journal. Its protocols, tools and results will be presented at several national and international academic conferences of relevant orthogeriatric (scientific) associations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06079905 .

Posterolateral or Direct Lateral Surgical Approach for Hemiarthroplasty After a Hip Fracture: A Randomized Clinical Trial Alongside a Natural Experiment.

Importance: Hip fractures in older adults are serious injuries that result in disability, higher rates of illness and death, and a substantial strain on health care resources. High-quality evidence to improve hip fracture care regarding the surgical approach of hemiarthroplasty is lacking. Objective: To compare 6-month outcomes of the posterolateral approach (PLA) and direct lateral approach (DLA) for hemiarthroplasty in patients with acute femoral neck fracture. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing DLA and PLA was performed alongside a natural experiment (NE) at 14 centers in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18 years or older with an acute femoral neck fracture were included, with or without dementia. Secondary surgery of the hip, pathological fractures, or patients with multitrauma were excluded. Recruitment took place between February 2018 and January 2022. Treatment allocation was random or pseudorandom based on geographical location and surgeon preference. Statistical analysis was performed from July 2022 to September 2022. Exposure: Hemiarthroplasty using PLA or DLA. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was health-related quality of life 6 months after surgery, quantified with the EuroQol Group 5-Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Secondary outcomes included dislocations, fear of falling and falls, activities of daily living, pain, and reoperations. To improve generalizability, a novel technique was used for data fusion of the RCT and NE. Results: A total of 843 patients (542 [64.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 82.2 [7.5] years) participated, with 555 patients in the RCT (283 patients in the DLA group; 272 patients in the PLA group) and 288 patients in the NE (172 patients in the DLA group; 116 patients in the PLA group). In the RCT, mean EQ-5D-5L utility scores at 6 months were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.45-0.55) after DLA and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.44-0.54) after PLA, with 77% completeness. The between-group difference (-0.04 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.04]) was not statistically significant nor clinically meaningful. Most secondary outcomes were comparable between groups, but PLA was associated with more dislocations than DLA (RCT: 15 of 272 patients [5.5%] in PLA vs 1 of 283 patients [0.4%] in DLA; NE: 6 of 113 patients [5.3%]) in PLA vs 2 of 175 patients [1.1%] in DLA). Data fusion resulted in an effect size of 0.00 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.05) for the EQ-5D-5L and an odds ratio of 12.31 (95% CI, 2.77 to 54.70) for experiencing a dislocation after PLA. Conclusions and Relevance: This combined RCT and NE found that among patients treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty after an acute femoral neck fracture, PLA was not associated with a better quality of life than DLA. Rates of dislocation and reoperation were higher after PLA. Randomized and pseudorandomized data yielded similar outcomes, which suggests a strengthening of these findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04438226.

Differences in characteristics and outcomes of older patients hospitalized for COVID-19 after introduction of vaccination.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to investigate characteristics and outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated older patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre cohort study among patients aged ≥70 years hospitalized for COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: 263 vaccinated and 82 unvaccinated patients were included. Vaccinated patients were older (median age 79 vs. 76 years; p < 0.001), more patients were male (66.2% vs. 53.7%; p = 0.040), had more comorbidities [median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) 2 vs. 1; p 0.016] and were frailer [Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) ≥ 4 68% vs. 49%; p 0.015]. Vaccinated patients were admitted earlier after symptom onset (median 5 days vs. 7 days) but were equally ill at time of hospital admission. After correction for frailty, comorbidity and disease severity, risk of in-hospital mortality was three times lower for vaccinated patients (HR 0.30 95% CI 0.16-0.56; p < 0.001) compared to unvaccinated patients. CONCLUSION: Vaccinated patients had lower risk of in-hospital mortality than unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 infection. These findings suggest that vaccinated patients benefit from the protective effect of the vaccine against death during hospital stay, outweighing the increased mortality risk that is associated with older age, greater frailty and more numerous comorbidities. This could be an encouragement for older people to receive age-appropriate vaccines, although no definite conclusions can be drawn for this was no intervention study.

Preparing for future pandemics: frailty associates with mortality in hospitalised older people during the entire COVID-19 pandemic, a Dutch multicentre cohort study.

PURPOSE: Viral mutations and improved prevention or treatment options may have changed the association of frailty with mortality throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated how associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality changed throughout the pandemic in older people hospitalised for COVID-19. METHODS: The COVID-OLD study included COVID-19 patients aged ≥ 70 years hospitalised during the first (early 2020), second (late 2020), third (late 2021) or fourth wave (early 2022). Based on the clinical frailty scale, patients were categorised as fit (1-3), pre-frail (4-5) or frail (6-9). Associations of frailty with in-hospital mortality were assessed with pairwise comparisons with fit as reference category and modelled using binary logistic regression adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: This study included 2362 patients (mean age 79.7 years, 60% men). In the first wave, in-hospital mortality was 46% in patients with frailty and 27% in fit patients. In-hospital mortality decreased in each subsequent wave to 25% in patients with frailty and 11% in fit patients in the fourth wave. After adjustments, an overall higher risk of in-hospital mortality was found in frail (OR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.66-3.07) and pre-frail (OR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.27-2.35) patients compared to fit patients, which did not change over time (p for interaction = 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty remained associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality throughout the entire COVID-19 pandemic, although overall in-hospital mortality rates decreased. Frailty therefore remains a relevant risk factor in all stages of a pandemic and is important to consider in prevention and treatment guidelines for future pandemics.