ArticleActa orthopaedica2025
Trends and predictors of cemented fixation in arthroplasty for patients with a hip fracture: a Canadian Joint Replacement Registry study.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2025. 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.
- Editorial: The value of arthroplasty registries: from surveillance to societal impact.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeCemented fixation is widely recommended during arthroplasty for hip fractures, yet it has not been universally adopted by all surgeons and hospitals. We aimed to identify which factors were associated with a higher likelihood of cemented fixation.
methodsWe identified patients ≥ 55 years old with hip fractures treated with primary arthroplasty in Canada between 2012 and 2022. We determined fixation method along with several surgeon and hospital characteristics from the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry and other Canadian databases. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of the association between these covariates and cemented fixation.
resultsWe identified 65,823 patients who underwent arthroplasty for hip fractures. The proportion of cases with cemented fixation for hemiarthroplasty increased by 30 percentage points over the study period; the proportion for total hip arthroplasty (THA) remained relatively stable. High-volume hospitals (≥ 500 annual hip arthroplasties with ≥ 25% of these for fractures) were least likely to cement, OR = 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27-0.34 vs low-volume hospitals (< 500 cases/< 25% for fractures). High volume surgeons (≥ 50 hips/year, ≥ 16/year for fractures) had an OR of 0.80 (CI 0.75-0.84) compared with < 50 hips/year surgeons. Teaching hospitals were more likely to cement, OR = 1.16 (CI 1.10-1.22). The OR of cemented fixation for hemiarthroplasty (vs THA) rose from 1.13 (CI 0.99-1.29) at the start of the study period to 2.17 (CI 2.02-2.33) at the end.
conclusionThe use of cemented fixation in hip fracture arthroplasty has increased across Canada over the last decade. However, surgeons and hospitals that treat more hip fracture patients are less likely to cement. The proportion of cemented fixation increases with patient age. Cement use is more common in hemiarthroplasty than in THA.
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.