Factors affecting transfusion requirement after hip fracture: Can we reduce the need for blood?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are common injuries that result in blood loss and frequently require the transfusion of blood products. We sought to identify risk factors leading to increased blood transfusion in patients presenting with hip fractures, especially those factors that are modifiable. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of all patients who had fixation of their hip fractures between October 2005 and February 2010. The need for transfusion was correlated with potential risk factors, including age, sex, preoperative hemoglobin, fracture type, fixation method and more. RESULTS: A total of 835 patients had fixation of their hip fractures during the study period; 631 met the inclusion criteria and 249 of them (39.5%) were transfused. We found an association between need for blood transfusion and female sex (p = 0.018), lower preoperative hemoglobin (p < 0.001), fracture type (p < 0.001) and fixation method (p < 0.001). Compared with femoral neck fractures, there was a 2.37 times greater risk of blood transfusion in patients with intertrochanteric fractures (p < 0.001) and a 4.03 times greater risk in those with subtrochanteric fractures (p < 0.001). Dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation decreased the risk of transfusion by about half compared with intramedullary nail or hemiarthroplasty. We found no association with age, delay to operation (p = 0.17) or duration of surgery (p = 0.30). CONCLUSION: The only modifiable risk factor identified was fixation method. When considering blood transfusion requirements in isolation, we suggest a potential benefit in using a DHS for intertrochanteric and femoral neck fractures amenable to DHS fixation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".