Representation to the accident and emergency department within 1-year of a fractured neck of femur

Background: The fractured neck of femur (NOF) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. The mortality attendant upon such fractures is 10% at 1 month and 30% at one year with a cost to the NHS of £1.4 billion annually. This retrospective study sought to examine rates and prevailing trends in representation to A&E in the year following a NOF fracture in an attempt to identify the leading causes behind the morbidity and mortality associated with this fracture. Methods: 1108 patients who suffered a fractured NOF between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2007 were identified from a University Hospital A&E database. This database was then used to identify those patients who represented within 1-year following the initial fracture. The presenting complaint, provisional diagnosis and the outcome of this presentation were identified at this time. Results: 234 patients (21%) returned to A&E on 368 occasions in the year following a hip fracture. 77% (284/368) of these presentations necessitated admission. Falls, infection and fracture were the leading causes of representation. Falls accounted for 20% (57/284) of admissions; 20.7% of patients were admitted because of a fracture, while 56.6% of admissions were for medical ailments of which infection was the chief precipitant (28% (45/161)). Discussion: The causes for representation are varied and multifactorial. The results of this study suggest that some of those events or ailments necessitating readmission may be obviated and potentially reduced by interventions that can be instituted during the primary admission and continued following discharge

Thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery: a survey

Abstract Background Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common complication following major joint surgery. While attention has been focused upon the incidence of thromboembolic disease following total hip or knee arthroplasty or emergency surgery for hip fracture, there exists a gap in the medical literature examining the incidence of VTE in spinal surgery. Evidence suggests that the prevalence of DVT after spinal surgery is higher than generally recognized but with a shortage of epidemiological data, guidelines for optimal prophylaxis are limited. This survey, of individuals attending the 2009 British Association of Spinal Surgeons Annual Meeting, sought to examine prevailing trends in VTE thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery, adherence to guideline outlined by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and to compare selections made by orthopaedic and neurosurgeons. Methods We developed a questionnaire with eight clinical scenarios. Participants were asked to supply details on their specialty and to select which method(s) of thromboprophylaxis they would employ for each scenario. Chi squared analysis was used for statistical comparison of the questionnaire responses. Results 73% of neurosurgical respondents' and 31% of orthopaedic surgeons employed low molecular weight heparin (p Conclusion There is no clear consensus in thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery. There was a significant difference in selections across surgical disciplines with neurosurgeons more closely adhering to national guidelines. Further research examining the epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in spinal surgery and the risks-benefit relationship of thromboprophylaxis is warranted.</p

Thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery : a survey

Background: Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common complication following major joint surgery. While attention has been focused upon the incidence of thromboembolic disease following total hip or knee arthroplasty or emergency surgery for hip fracture, there exists a gap in the medical literature examining the incidence of VTE in spinal surgery. Evidence suggests that the prevalence of DVT after spinal surgery is higher than generally recognized but with a shortage of epidemiological data, guidelines for optimal prophylaxis are limited. This survey, of individuals attending the 2009 British Association of Spinal Surgeons Annual Meeting, sought to examine prevailing trends in VTE thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery, adherence to guideline outlined by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and to compare selections made by orthopaedic and neurosurgeons. Methods: We developed a questionnaire with eight clinical scenarios. Participants were asked to supply details on their specialty and to select which method(s) of thromboprophylaxis they would employ for each scenario. Chi squared analysis was used for statistical comparison of the questionnaire responses. Results: 73% of neurosurgical respondents' and 31% of orthopaedic surgeons employed low molecular weight heparin (p < 0.001). Neurosurgeons also selected anti-embolism stockings more frequently (79% v 50%) while orthopaedic surgeons preferred mechanical prophylaxis (26% v 9%). There was no significant difference between trauma and non-trauma scenarios (p = 0.05). Conclusion: There is no clear consensus in thromboprophylaxis in spinal surgery. There was a significant difference in selections across surgical disciplines with neurosurgeons more closely adhering to national guidelines. Further research examining the epidemiology of venous thromboembolism in spinal surgery and the risks-benefit relationship of thromboprophylaxis is warranted