Retrospective Evaluation of a Restrictive Transfusion Strategy in Older Adults with Hip Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the association between a restrictive transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications during hospitalization for hip fracture with the association between a liberal transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications, accounting for all transfusions from the emergency department to postacute rehabilitation settings. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Perioperative geriatric care unit. PARTICIPANTS: All individuals aged 70 and older admitted to the emergency department for hip fracture and hospitalized in our perioperative geriatric care unit (N=667; n=193 in the liberal transfusion group, n=474 in the restrictive transfusion group) from July 2009 to April 2016. INTERVENTION: A restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin level threshold ≥8 g/dL or symptoms) used from January 2012 to April 2016 was compared with the liberal transfusion strategy (hemoglobin level threshold ≥10 g/dL) used from July 2009 to December 2011. MEASUREMENTS: Primary endpoint was in-hospital acute cardiovascular complications (heart failure, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation or stroke). RESULTS: The change to a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with fewer acute cardiovascular complications (odds ratio=0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.31-0.67, p<.001), without any noticeable difference in in-hospital or 6-month mortality. The change also led to a reduction in packed red blood cell units used per participant (median 1, interquartile range (IQR) 0-2 in restrictive vs median 2, IQR 0-3 in liberal transfusion strategy, P<.001). In rehabilitation settings, the frequency of transfusion was greater with the restrictive transfusion strategy than the liberal transfusion strategy (18% vs 9%, P<.001). CONCLUSION: A restrictive transfusion strategy in older adults with hip fracture was found to be safe and was associated with fewer cardiovascular complications but more transfusions in rehabilitation settings. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".