ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2022
Does time to surgery for traumatic hip fracture impact the efficacy of fascia iliaca blocks? A brief report.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Outcomes after traumatic hip fracture have shown to be significantly improved with timely surgical management. This study determined whether there were differences in efficacy of fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) on pain outcomes in patients with hip fracture, once stratified by time to surgery. Methods: Trauma patients (55-90 years) admitted to five Level I/II trauma centers within 12 hours of hip fracture were included. Patients with coagulopathy, significant multi-trauma (injury severity score >16), bilateral hip fractures, and postoperative FICBs were excluded. The primary exposure was analgesia modality: adjunctive FICB or systemic analgesics (no FICB). Study endpoints were incidence of delirium through 48 hours postoperatively (%), preoperative and postoperative oral morphine equivalents (OMEs), and preoperative and postoperative pain (0-10 scale). Adjusted regression models were used to examine the effect of FICB on outcomes; all models were stratified by time from arrival to surgery, ≤24 hours (earlier surgery; n=413) and >24 hours (later surgery; n=143). Results: FICB use was similar with earlier and later surgery (70.2% vs 76.2%), and there were no demographic differences by utilization of FICB, by time to surgery. In the earlier surgery group, preoperative pain was lower for patients with FICB versus no FICB (3.6 vs 4.5, p<0.001), with no difference by FICB for delirium (OR 1.00, p>0.99) or OMEs (p=0.75 preoperative, p=0.91 postoperative). In the later surgery group, there was a nearly twofold reduction in preoperative OMEs with FICB than no FICB (25.5 mg vs 45.2 mg, p=0.04), with no differences for delirium (OR 4.21, p=0.18), pain scores (p=0.25 preoperative, p=0.27 postoperative), and postoperative OMEs (p=0.34). Conclusions: Compared with systemic analgesia, FICB resulted in improved pain scores at the preoperative assessment among patients with earlier surgery, whereas FICB reduced opioid consumption over the preoperative period only when surgery was later than 24 hours from arrival. Level of evidence: II, prospective, therapeutic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.