Monitoring the performance of hip fracture treatment in Finland

Annals of Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages

  Sund, Reijo ^a   Juntunen, Merja ^a   Lüthje, Peter ^b   Huusko, Tiina ^c   Häkkinen, Unto ^a  

^a NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b North Kymi Hospital   (Finland)

^c SOCIAL INSURANCE INSTITUTION   (Finland)

Author keywords

Administrative registers; costs; effectiveness; episodes of care; hip fracture; indicators; monitoring system; quality; record linkage

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA BASE; FINLAND; FOLLOW UP; HIP FRACTURE; HOSPITAL; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PATIENT MONITORING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; TREATMENT DURATION;

FEMALE; FINLAND; HIP FRACTURES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); REGISTRIES;

EID: 79957971130     PISSN: 07853890     EISSN: 13652060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/07853890.2011.586360     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Liporace FA, Egol KA, Tejwani N, Zuckerman JD, Koval KJ. What's new in hip fractures? Current concepts. Am J Orthop. 2005;34:66-74.
2. Zuckerman JD. Hip fracture. N Engl J Med. 1996;334: 1519-25. (Pubitemid 26166896)
3. Sund R. [Hip Fracture incidence in Finland 1998-2002]. Duodecim. 2006;122:1085-91.
4. Marks R, Allegrante JP, Ronald MacKenzie C, Lane JM. Hip fractures among the elderly: causes, consequences and control. Ageing Res Rev. 2003;2:57-93. (Pubitemid 37443918)
5. Heithoff KA, Lohr KN, editors. Hip Fracture: Setting Priorities for Effectiveness Research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1990.
6. Huusko T, Karppi P, Avikainen V, Kautiainen H, Sulkava R. Significant changes in the surgical methods and length of hospital stay of hip fracture patients occurring over 10 years in Central Finland. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1999;88:55-60. (Pubitemid 29205296)
7. SIGN. Prevention and Management of Hip Fracture in Older People. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN); 2002.
8. Duodecim Study Group, Finnish Orthopedic Society. [Care of patients with hip fractures]. Duodecim. 2006;122:358-79.
9. Treml J, Kroker PB. Hip fracture audit: time for standards to be evidence-based. Int Orthop. 2000;24:181-3.
10. Parker MJ, Currie CT, Mountain JA, Thorngren KG. Standardised audit of hip fracture in Europe (SAHFE). Hip Int 1998;8:10-5. (Pubitemid 28238282)
11. Heikkinen T, Willig R, Hänninen A, Koskinen K, Mannismäki P, Alavaikko A, et al. Hip fractures in Finland-a comparison of patient characteristics and outcomes in six hospitals. Scand J Surg. 2004;93:234-40. (Pubitemid 39482302)
12. Nurmi I, Narinen A, Lüthje P, Tanninen S. Functional outcome and survival after hip fracture in elderly: a prospective study of 106 consecutive patients. J Orthopaed Traumatol. 2004;5:7-14. (Pubitemid 39232405)
13. Sund R, Nurmi-Lüthje I, Lüthje P, Tanninen S, Narinen A, Keskimäki I. Comparing properties of audit data and routinely collected register data in case of performance assessment of hip fracture treatment in Finland. Methods Inf Med. 2007;46:558-66. (Pubitemid 47598974)
14. Sund R. Methodological perspectives for register-based health system performance assessment. Developing a hip fracture monitoring system in Finland. STAKES research report 174. Helsinki: National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health; 2008. http://urn.fi /URN: ISBN:978-951-33-2132-1.
15. Sund R. Utilization of routinely collected administrative data in monitoring of aging dependent hip fracture incidence. Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2007;4(2); published online 7 June 2007, doi:10.1186/1742-5573-4-2 (Pubitemid 47012197)
16. Hornbrook MC, Hurtado AV, Johnson RE. Health care episodes: defi nition, measurement and use. Med Care Rev. 1985;42:163-218.
17. Heikkinen T, Jalovaara P. Four or twelve months ' follow-up in the evaluation of functional outcome after hip fracture surgery? Scand J Surg. 2005;94:59-66. (Pubitemid 40523876)
18. Peltola M, Juntunen M, Häkkinen U, Rosenqvist G, Seppälä TT, Sund R. Methodological and statistical issues in register based evaluation of cost and outcomes in health care. Ann Med. 2011;43:S4-13.
19. Sund R, Liski A. Quality effects of operative delay on mortality in hip fracture treatment. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14: 371-7. (Pubitemid 41495126)
20. Riihimäki J, Sund R, Vehtari A. Analysing the length of care episode after hip fracture: a nonparametric and a parametric Bayesian approach. Health Care Manage Sci. 2010;13: 170-81.
21. Sund R, Riihimäki J, Mäkelä M, Vehtari A, Lüthje P, Huusko T, et al. Modeling the length of the care episode after hip fracture: does the type of fracture matter? Scand J Surg. 2009;98:169-74.
22. Sund R. Modeling the volume-effectiveness relationship in the case of hip fracture treatment in Finland. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10(238): published online 13 August 2010, doi:10.1186/1472-6963-10-238.
23. Nurmi-Lüthje I, Sund R, Juntunen M, Lüthje P. Post-hip fracture use of prescribed calcium plus vitamin D or vitamin D supplements and anti-osteoporotic drugs are associated with lower mortality. A nationwide study in Finland. J Bone Miner Res. 2011: published online 23 February 2011. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.375.
24. Thorngren KG. National registration of hip fractures. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:580-2.
25. Heikkinen T, Partanen J, Ristiniemi J, Jalovaara P. Evaluation of 238 consecutive patients with the extended data set of the Standardised Audit for Hip Fractures in Europe (SAHFE). Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27:1107-15. (Pubitemid 41699882)