Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35040775›Full record

ArticleSICOT-J2022

Managing periprosthetic fractures - a review of the hub and spoke model.

Srikanth Mudiganty, Luke Hughes, Qaisar Choudry, Awais Bokhari

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SICOT-J, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Optimizing periprosthetic fracture management and in-hospital outcome: insights from the PIPPAS multicentric study of 1387 cases in Spain.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Srikanth MudigantySenior Clinical Fellow, Trauma and Orthopaedics, Barts Health NHS Trust, E1 1FR London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9585-2569
Luke HughesSpecialist Registrar, Trauma and Orthopaedics, East Lancashire NHS Hospitals Trust, BB2 3HH Blackburn, UK.
Qaisar ChoudryConsultant, Trauma and Orthopaedics, East Lancashire NHS Hospitals Trust, BB2 3HH Blackburn, UK.
Awais BokhariConsultant, Trauma and Orthopaedics, East Lancashire NHS Hospitals Trust, BB2 3HH Blackburn, UK.
East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeriprosthetic fractures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The "hub and spoke model" consists of a central organisation (the hub) and a series of secondary units (the spokes). This study reviews the presentation, management, and outcomes of periprosthetic fractures at a large general district hospital, the Royal Blackburn Hospital.

methodsA retrospective data analysis for patients presenting with periprosthetic fractures from a single general district hospital between January 2011 and December 2020. Details recorded were patient demographics, primary arthroplasty procedure, fracture management, ASA grade, morbidity and mortality, and Unified Classification System for Periprosthetic Fractures (UCSPF).

resultsWith 229 periprosthetic fractures, the number tripled in 2020 that admitted in 2011. The mean age was 78.6 years (range 33-100), 151 were females. Seventy-five percent of the fractures were managed locally, while 25% a referral to the higher specialist centre was sort. Of the 57 referrals, 50 were transferred to the hub, 5 were operated on locally, and 2 were managed non-operatively. Higher-level care transfer resulted in a delayed definitive treatment (4.8 versus 12 days, p = 0.001). About 94.4% of patients treated locally had a favourable outcome versus 92% of patients treated at the hub hospital. Cumulative mortality rates for the two sites were comparable. DISCUSSION: Most of the patients presenting to the local spoke hospital with periprosthetic fractures were managed in house. For this practice to be preserved, there is a need for future planning, such as maintaining an appropriate skill mix at spoke units. Discussion between specialists at the hub and spoke hospitals reduced patient transfer by 14%.

Indexed as

HubPeriprosthetic fracturesSpokeUnified classification system

Identifiers

PMID35040775
PMCPMC8765126
OpenAlexW4205805912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.