MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2606438226 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-16-00445

AAOS Appropriate Use Criteria: Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly

2017· letter· en· W2606438226 sur OpenAlexaff
Varatharaj Mounasamy, Pierre Guy, Stephen L. Kates

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2017
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHip and Femur Fractures
Établissements canadiensCanadian Orthopaedic Foundation
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAsymptomaticPhysical examinationPalpationRadiographySurgeryHip fractureMedical historyPhysical therapyOsteoporosis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) approved the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) document Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly in an effort to assist the clinician in the evaluation and management of these injuries. Here, we present two clinical scenarios and postoperative rehabilitation treatment options to demonstrate how these AUC can be incorporated into clinical decision making. Case 1 History A 71-year-old woman presented to the hospital after slipping and falling from a ground-level height while gardening in her back yard. Prior to falling, she was a high-functioning person with high activity demands. After her fall, the patient experienced pain in her left hip and could not bear weight in her left lower extremity. Patient Assessment and Treatment The patient was transported to the emergency department, and an unstable, displaced reverse obliquity intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip was diagnosed on plain radiographs (Figure 1). Asymptomatic hip osteoarthritis was noted radiographically. Shortening of the left lower extremity and external rotation were diagnosed based on physical examination, along with tenderness to palpation of the left hip. The patient also experienced tenderness of the left hip on the log rolling maneuver. She had a history of asymptomatic mitral valve prolapse, with normal ejection fraction on echocardiography.Figure 1: AP pelvic (A) and lateral (B) radiographs demonstrating a reverse obliquity fracture of the left proximal femur of a 71-year-old woman.The patient was seen and assessed by the internal medicine team for surgical fitness. She was felt to be a satisfactory surgical candidate and in optimal condition. On the day after admission, the patient underwent treatment with a long cephalomedullary nail (Figure 2).Figure 2: Same patient as in Figure 1. Intraoperative AP (A) and lateral (B) fluoroscopic images of the proximal left femur and intraoperative AP (C) and lateral (D) fluoroscopic images of the distal left femur demonstrating satisfactory reduction and fixation with the use of a long cephalomedullary nail.Rehabilitation After surgery, the patient underwent physical and occupational therapy. Weight bearing as tolerated was begun on postoperative day 1. On postoperative day 5, the patient was discharged home with home health care. Discussion This case best reflects Scenario 26 of the AAOS AUC document Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly1 (Table 1).Table 1: Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly: Scenario 26Case 2 History A 72-year-old man presented to the hospital after he missed a step at home, experiencing a ground-level fall onto his left hip that resulted in immediate pain and inability to ambulate. Prior to injury, he was an independent ambulator with moderate to low functional capacity and lived at home. Patient Assessment and Treatment The patient was transferred from another hospital after a 4-day delay at that first hospital. The patient had previously undergone aortic valve replacement to manage aortic stenosis. He also had a history of cardiac arrest, cardiomyopathy, deep vein thrombosis with pulmonary embolism (managed with warfarin), and cephalomedullary nailing of his right hip to manage a hip fracture. The patient was evaluated by the internal medicine team for preoperative risk assessment. He was also assessed by a cardiologist. Surgical treatment was undertaken <24 hours after hospital admission. The patient was taking warfarin at the time of surgery; because of his anticoagulation status, general anesthesia was administered. He was treated surgically with the use of a short cephalomedullary nail in his left hip to achieve fixation of the stable intertrochanteric hip fracture (Figures 3 and 4).Figure 3: Preoperative AP (A) and lateral (B) radiographs of the pelvis demonstrating a stable intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip in a 72-year-old man.Figure 4: Same patient as in Figure 3. Postoperative AP pelvic radiograph (A), as well as AP (B) and lateral (C) radiographs of the left hip, demonstrating fixation of the stable intertrochanteric fracture of the left hip with the use of a short cephalomedullary nail.Rehabilitation Postoperatively, the patient was allowed to bear weight as tolerated. He was discharged to a skilled nursing facility for rehabilitation on postoperative day 3. Discussion This case best reflects Scenario 16 of the AAOS AUC document Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly.1 As seen in Table 2, the use of a short cephalomedullary nail is an acceptable option, although the voting panel felt that a sliding hip screw might have been a more appropriate choice for this patient.Table 2: Treatment of Hip Fractures in the Elderly: Scenario 16

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,054

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,048
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0050,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,341
Écart entre enseignants0,299 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsMême sujetHip and Femur FracturesTravaux en français237 207