Free
Perioperative Medicine  |   July 2015
Propensity Score–matched Comparison of Postoperative Adverse Outcomes between Geriatric Patients Given a General or a Neuraxial Anesthetic for Hip Surgery: A Population-based Study
Author Notes
  • From the Department of Anesthesiology (C.-C. Chu, K.-T.C., J.-P.S., J.-Y.C., J.-J.W.), Department of Medical Research (S.-F.W., J.-J.W.), and Department of Nephrology (C.-C. Chien), Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan; Department of Senior Service Management (J.-Y.C.), Department of Hospital and Health Care Administration (S.-F.W.), and Department of Recreation and Health-Care Management (C.-C. Chu), Chia-Nan University of Pharmacy and Science, Tainan, Taiwan; and Department of Medical Laboratory Science and Biotechnology, Chung Hwa University of Medical Technology, Tainan, Taiwan (C.-C. Chien).
  • Parts of the data were presented as a poster at the 2012 Euroanaesthesia Annual Meeting, Barcelona, Spain, May 31 to June 2, 2012.
    Parts of the data were presented as a poster at the 2012 Euroanaesthesia Annual Meeting, Barcelona, Spain, May 31 to June 2, 2012.×
  • Submitted for publication June 15, 2014. Accepted for publication March 6, 2015.
    Submitted for publication June 15, 2014. Accepted for publication March 6, 2015.×
  • Address correspondence to Dr. Chu: Department of Anesthesiology, Chi Mei Medical Center, 901 Zhonghua Road, Yongkang District, Tainan 71004, Taiwan. chinchen.chu@gmail.com. Information on purchasing reprints may be found at www.anesthesiology.org or on the masthead page at the beginning of this issue. Anesthesiology’s articles are made freely accessible to all readers, for personal use only, 6 months from the cover date of the issue.
Article Information
Perioperative Medicine / Clinical Science / Airway Management / Central and Peripheral Nervous Systems / Critical Care / Geriatric Anesthesia / Trauma / Burn Care
Perioperative Medicine   |   July 2015
Propensity Score–matched Comparison of Postoperative Adverse Outcomes between Geriatric Patients Given a General or a Neuraxial Anesthetic for Hip Surgery: A Population-based Study
Anesthesiology 7 2015, Vol.123, 136-147. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000695
Anesthesiology 7 2015, Vol.123, 136-147. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000695
Abstract

Background:: The effects of the mode of anesthesia on major adverse postoperative outcomes in geriatric patients are still inconclusive. The authors hypothesized that a neuraxial anesthetic (NA) rather than a general anesthetic (GA) would yield better in-hospital postoperative outcomes for geriatric patients undergoing hip surgery.

Methods:: The authors used data from Taiwan’s 1997–2011 in-patient claims database to evaluate the effect of anesthesia on in-hospital outcomes. The endpoints were mortality, stroke, transient ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, and renal failure. Of the 182,307 geriatric patients who had hip surgery, a GA was given to 53,425 (29.30%) and an NA to 128,882 (70.70%). To adjust for baseline differences and selection bias, patients were matched on propensity scores, which left 52,044 GA and 52,044 NA patients.

Results:: GA-group patients had a greater percentage and higher odds of adverse in-hospital outcomes than did NA-group patients: death (2.62 vs. 2.13%; odds ratio [OR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.35; P < 0.001), stroke (1.61 vs. 1.38%; OR, 1.18, 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.31; P = 0.001), respiratory failure (1.67 vs. 0.63%; OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 2.38 to 3.01; P < 0.001), and intensive care unit admission (11.03 vs. 6.16%; OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.87 to 2.05; P < 0.001), analyzed using conditional logistic regression. Moreover, patients given a GA had longer hospital stays (10.77 ± 8.23 vs. 10.44 ± 6.67 days; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.40; P < 0.001) and higher costs (New Taiwan Dollars [NT$] 86,606 ± NT$74,162 vs. NT$74,494 ± NT$45,264; 95% CI, 11,366 to 12,859; P < 0.001).

Conclusion:: For geriatric patients undergoing hip surgery, NA was associated with fewer odds of adverse outcomes than GA.

Abstract

Using Taiwan’s in-patient claims database, the effect of anesthetic technique on in-hospital outcomes was assessed. Neuraxial techniques were found to have lower rates of in-hospital adverse outcomes of several types including mortality, stroke, and others.

What We Already Know about This Topic
  • Fracture and degenerative disease make hip surgery common in the elderly

  • Previous studies suggest that neuraxial anesthetic techniques may have some advantages over general anesthesia for hip surgery

What This Article Tells Us That Is New
  • Using Taiwan’s in-patient claims database, the effect of anesthetic technique on in-hospital outcomes was assessed

  • Neuraxial techniques were found to have lower rates of in-hospital adverse outcomes of several types including mortality, stroke, and others

HIP fracture is the second leading cause of hospitalization for the elderly and is becoming a major public health problem as the mean age of the population increases.1–4  The incidence increases considerably with age, increasing from 22.5 (men) and 23.9 (women) per 100,000 population at age 50 to 630.2 (men) and 1,289.3 (women) per 100,000 population by age 80.5  Moreover, hip fractures are often associated with devastating complications that create medical and financial burdens for society. The risks of fatal or life-threatening events for geriatric patients increase several-fold after hip surgery.2,6  Many factors affect the outcomes of patients after hip surgery: age, timing of surgery, comorbidities, etc.7–10  There is a debate on whether the type of anesthesia has any substantive effect on these risks.11–13  A neuraxial anesthetic (NA) rather than a general anesthetic (GA) has the advantages of fewer incidents of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), less postoperative cognitive dysfunction, fewer cases of pneumonia, fewer fatal pulmonary embolisms, and less postoperative hypoxia.11  Whether an NA reduces other major complications, such as mortality, acute postoperative stroke, myocardial infarction, and renal failure, is still controversial because most studies have been limited either by small sample sizes11–16  or by medical center records,17–20  both of which may result in underestimating the rates of adverse outcomes in the general population. Two meta-analyses,15,16  therefore, were unable to decide whether a GA or an NA induced more major postoperative morbidities. One recent large-scale report21  using the New York State In-patient Database found that patients given an NA were associated with fewer pulmonary complications and less in-hospital mortality than were patients given a GA. Because the median age of the populations of most developed countries is increasing, the number of elderly (≥70 yr old) patients is growing, and the healthcare resources burden that elderly patients place on societies is increasing,22  a conclusive answer to this question is becoming more important. More large-scale nationwide population-based studies are urgently needed before we can confidently conclude what the effects are of the mode of anesthesia on the occurrence of adverse outcomes in hip fracture surgery.
We hypothesized that an NA rather than a GA would be associated with better in-hospital outcomes for geriatric patients given hip repair surgery. We also hypothesized that the association of the mode of anesthesia with outcomes would be different between patients with different fracture types and the hospital accreditation levels. To address this issue, we used Taiwan’s 14-yr nationwide population-based National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) as our data source to test our hypothesis. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Moreover, we focused on five other major adverse in-hospital outcomes as our secondary endpoints: stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), respiratory failure, renal failure, and myocardial infarction. Furthermore, we compared the need for mechanical ventilator support, the need for prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stays, the length of hospital stays (LOHS), and the total hospital costs between these two cohorts as our tertiary endpoints because the economic burden is another worthwhile concern.
Materials and Methods
Database
Taiwan launched a single-payer National Health Insurance (NHI) program on March 1, 1995. The NHI offers comprehensive medical care coverage to all Taiwan residents. As of 2011, approximately 22.60 million (>99%) of Taiwan’s 22.96 million legal residents (citizens and noncitizens) were enrolled in this program. The NHIRD provides encrypted patient identification numbers, sex, date of birth, dates of admission and discharge, the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes of diagnoses (up to five) and procedures (up to five), details of prescriptions, and costs covered and paid for by the NHI.
We used the in-patient claims database for 1997 to 2011 because almost all patients with hip fractures in Taiwan are hospitalized. The dataset was released with deidentified secondary data for public research. The Taiwan National Health Research Institutes approved the current study. Moreover, because all types of personal identification were encrypted to secure patient privacy, the current study was granted an exemption from a full ethical review by the Chi Mei Hospital Institutional Review Board (Tainan, Taiwan).
Selection of Patients and Variables
The inclusion criteria were that all patients had to be 65 yr old or older, have an ICD-9-CM principal discharge diagnosis code of 820.X, have been surgically treated and assigned at least one of the following treatment codes: (1) closed reduction of fracture with internal fixation (ICD-9-CM 79.1), (2) open reduction of fracture with internal fixation (ICD-9-CM 79.3), (3) total hip arthroplasty (ICD-9-CM 81.5), or (4) hemiarthroplasty (ICD-9-CM 81.4). We excluded patients coded as treated with both a GA and an NA, only a local anesthetic, or no anesthetic. We focused on osteoporosis-related fracture; therefore, patients diagnosed with pathological fractures (codes 733.14 and 733.15), and patients who presented with a code (or codes) other than a hip fracture, which indicated multiple trauma (appendix 1), were also excluded (fig. 1). In addition, to prevent repeating the calculation, patients with repeated admissions under the same main diagnostic codes within 30 days were considered to have a single admission, and the length of stay was determined by adding the days of these admissions, that is, the days of the first admission plus the days of the second admission.
Fig. 1.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
Fig. 1.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
×
The participants were then stratified into two groups according to the type of anesthetic used for the surgery: (1) GA (order codes 96020C-96022C) and (2) NA: spinal anesthesia (order codes 96007C and 96008C) and epidural anesthesia (order codes 96005C and 96006C).
We also recorded the comorbidities of hypertension (ICD-9-CM codes 401 to 405), diabetes mellitus (ICD-9-CM code 250, 357.2, and 362.0), hyperlipidemia (ICD-9-CM code 272), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ICD-9-CM codes 490 to 496), heart disease (ICD-9-CM codes 393 to 398 and 424), dementia (ICD-9-CM codes 290, 294, and 331), and renal disease (ICD-9-CM codes 582, 583, 585, 586, and 588) (appendix 2). A modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI)23  was used to infer the health status of each patient: higher sums of weighted scores indicated greater disease severity; therefore, the CCI was used as a surrogate for the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification system.24 
The accreditation levels of hospitals were also recorded in the database. According to the Taiwan Joint Commission on Hospital Accreditation, hospitals are classified as medical centers, regional hospitals, and local hospitals. Generally, medical centers in Taiwan have 1,000 to 2,500 beds and provide tertiary care. Regional hospitals have 301 to 999 beds and provide secondary care. Local hospitals have fewer than 300 beds and provide primary care. In addition, medical centers do more staff training than do regional hospitals and local hospitals, which provide medical care to local areas and do not have a great training burden.25 
Propensity Score Matching
We used propensity score–matched analyses to reduce the selection bias and potential baseline differences between the GA and NA groups. Propensity scores were computed using modeling a logistic regression model in which the dependent variable was whether the patient was given an NA. The independent variables were age, sex, baseline comorbidities, the modified CCI score, fracture type (intracapsular and extracapsular: further subdivided into trochanteric, intertrochanteric, and subtrochanteric), surgery type (total hip replacement, hemiarthroplasty, revision hip replacement, and internal fixation), and hospital type (medical center, regional hospital, and local hospital). These selected variables were based on prior subject matter knowledge and empirical observation.7–10 
The multivariate regression model of propensity for patients given an NA had a C-statistic of 0.64. Before matching, patients managed with an NA (n = 128,882) had a median propensity score of 0.285475 (Q1~Q4: 0.183218~0.351895), and those managed with a GA (n = 53,425) had a median propensity score of 0.334389 (Q1~Q4: 0.268511~0.398691).
An SAS (SAS Institute, USA) matching macro, “%OneToManyMTCH,” 26  was used for this matching. It allows propensity score matching from 1-to-1 to 1-to-N. We set a caliper for nearest-neighbor matching within the first four to eight digits; for example, two patients with propensity scores of 0.12345678 and 0.12347123 matches on the first four digits (0.1234). The macro makes the “best” matches first and the “next-best” matches next in a hierarchical sequence until no more matches can be made. If no GA patient has a propensity score that lies within a four-digit width of an NA patient’s propensity score, then that NA patient is left unmatched and is not used in subsequent analyses.
Each GA patient was selected once at most. To verify the balance between the GA and NA groups, the standardized difference27  was computed to compare the distribution of the baseline covariates between the GA and NA groups. This matching resulted in two final study cohorts of 52,044 each (fig. 1). After matching, either NA-group or GA-group patients had a median propensity score of 0.332136 (Q1~Q4, 0.268312~0.394289). For these covariates, all standardized differences were less than 0.01 after propensity score matching.
Study Endpoints
Our study endpoints were in-hospital mortality (discharge death code) and five outcomes: (1) acute stroke (ICD-9-CM codes 430 to 436 and 997.02), (2) transient ischemic stroke (ICD-9-CM code 435), (3) acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (ICD-9-CM code 410), (4) acute respiratory failure (ICD-9-CM codes 518.81 to 518.82, 518.84, and 518.5), and (5) acute renal failure (ICD-9-CM codes 584.5 to 584.9) with hemodialysis (procedure code 39.95) or peritoneal dialysis (procedure code 54.98). Because it is customary for many Taiwanese to want to “die at home,” “in-hospital death” coded at discharge necessarily underestimates true hospital mortality. Therefore, except when “in-hospital death” was coded, we also presumed an in-hospital death for patients who withdrew from the NHI program within 30 days of hospital discharge because the NHI requires that expired patients be withdrawn within 30 days and because emigration, another reason for withdrawal, is highly unlikely shortly after surgery for a severe disease.
Our tertiary endpoints included (1) the need for ventilator support (order code 57001B), (2) duration of intensive care stay (order codes: 03010E, 03011F, 03012G, and 03013H), (3) LOHS, and (4) total hospital cost (New Taiwan Dollars [NT$]).
Statistical Analysis
SAS 9.3.1 for Windows (SAS Institute, Inc.) was used for this study. The differences in baseline characteristics and comorbid variables between the two cohorts were evaluated using Student t test for continuous variables and Pearson chi-square tests for categorical variables. The distributions of stroke type, ICU admission, and ventilator support were calculated using Pearson chi-square tests. Moreover, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were calculated using conditional logistic regression without further adjustment because the potential confounding factors were bundled by propensity score matching. The differences and 95% CIs of hospital stays and the costs of the two cohorts were calculated using Student t test. No a priori power calculations were conducted because this study is a retrospective study. To account for multiple outcome testing, we used the Bonferroni correction. Significance was set at P value less than 0.00625 (i.e., 0.05/8).
Results
Overall, 182,307 geriatric patients in Taiwan were given a GA or an NA for hip fracture repair surgery between 1997 and 2011 (table 1). The 53,425 GA-group patients (29.30%) were younger. The NA-group patients had more comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but less dementia, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, heart disease, and renal disease. The GA-group patients had a higher CCI than did the NA-group patients.
Table 1.
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery×
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Table 1.
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery×
×
In our two propensity score–matched cohorts, GA-group patients had a greater percentage and higher odds of in-hospital mortality than did NA-group patients (2.62 vs. 2.13%; OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.35; P < 0.001), analyzed using conditional logistic regression (table 2). Moreover, for major adverse outcomes, the incidence and odds of acute stroke were higher in GA-group patients (1.61 vs. 1.38%; OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.31; P = 0.001). Most of the strokes in both groups were ischemic: 594 of 840 strokes (70.71%) in the GA group and 545 of 717 strokes (76.01%) in the NA group; only 91 strokes (10.83%) in the GA group and 47 strokes (6.56%) in the NA group were hemorrhagic; however, the incidence of TIAs was not significantly different between these two cohorts (GA vs. NA: 0.17 vs. 0.18%; OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.27; P = 0.71). Furthermore, GA-group patients had a significantly higher percentage and odds of acute respiratory failure than did NA-group patients (1.67 vs. 0.63%; OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 2.38 to 3.08; P < 0.001). The incidence and odds of in-hospital AMI (GA vs. NA: 0.36 vs. 0.32%; OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37; P = 0.31) and renal failure that required acute dialysis (0.15 vs. 0.11%; OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.98; P = 0.06) were not significantly different.
Table 2.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 2.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
Within the propensity score–matched cohorts, GA-group patients had a significantly higher percentage and odds of ICU admissions (11.03 vs. 6.16%; OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.87 to 2.07; P < 0.001), more GA-group patients had significantly longer ICU stays (≥3 days: 2.32 vs. 0.79%; P < 0.001), needed significantly more postoperative ventilator support (7.70 vs. 1.44%; OR, 6.08; 95% CI, 5.59 to 6.61; P < 0.001), had a significantly longer LOHS (10.77 ± 8.23 vs. 10.44 ± 6.67 days; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.40%; P < 0.001), and had significantly higher total hospital expenditures (NT$86,606 ± NT$74,162 vs. NT$74,494 ± NT$45,263; 95% CI, 11,366 to 12,859; P < 0.001) (table 3).
Table 3.
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011×
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Table 3.
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011×
×
Regardless of whether their hip fracture was intracapsular or extracapsular, GA-group patients were always associated with higher odds for in-hospital mortality, respiratory failure, ICU admission, and the need for ventilator support than were NA-group patients. Moreover, patients with extracapsular hip fractures who underwent surgery with a GA had higher odds for an in-hospital stroke (estimated OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.53; P < 0.001). However, for intracapsular hip fracture patients, a GA was not associated with higher odds for a stroke than was an NA (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.24; P = 0.37). In addition, neither the postoperative odds for in-hospital acute renal failure nor the odds for an in-hospital AMI for intracapsular or extracapsular hip fracture patients who underwent surgery with a GA or an NA were significantly different (table 4).
Table 4.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 4.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
Regardless of whether patients underwent hip surgery in a medical center, regional hospital, or local hospital, GA-group patients had higher odds for in-hospital mortality, acute respiratory failure, ICU admission, and the need for mechanical ventilator support. However, for patients treated in a medical center or local hospital, the odds for an acute stroke were not significantly different between the GA and NA groups (medical center: OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.18; P = 0.89; local hospital: OR, 1.22, 95% CI, 0.938 to 1.60; P = 0.15) (table 5). This result was different for patients treated in a regional hospital, in which GA-group patients were estimated to have 1.33 times higher odds (95% CI, 1.15 to 1.54; P < 0.001) for an in-hospital stroke. The odds for a TIA, AMI, or renal failure, however, were not different regardless of the type of hospital.
Table 5.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 5.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
We divided the study periods into two subperiods (1997–2004 and 2005–2011) to analyze the temporal effect on the association of anesthesia and bad outcomes. We found that, in both subperiods, GA was associated with higher odds of in-hospital death, acute respiratory failure, ICU admission, and ventilator support than with NA. Although GA was associated with higher odds of acute stroke between 1997 and 2004 (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.51; P = 0.002), it was not between 2005 and 2011 (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.48; P = 0.046) (table 6).
Table 6.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Table 6.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan×
×
Discussion
We found that in-hospital mortality, stroke, and acute respiratory failure were more likely outcomes for elderly patients given a GA for hip fracture repair surgery than for those given an NA. In particular, patients with an extracapsular hip fracture, and those treated in regional hospitals and given a GA, had greater odds for postoperative stroke than did patients given an NA. Moreover, patients given a GA had longer hospital stays, a higher incidence of ICU admission, a greater need for mechanical ventilation support, and higher medical costs. Because our 14-yr data source is a nationwide population-based database, the statistical power of our analysis is stronger than that of other reports in the literature.
In the current study, the overall in-hospital mortality rate for geriatric patients given hip repair surgery between 1997 and 2011 was 2.37% (GA group: 2.61%; NA group: 2.26%). Although the difference seemed small, conditional logistic regression revealed that GA-group patients had a significantly higher OR for mortality than did NA-group patients (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.35). Our findings are consistent with those of some other studies. A study20  of 5,683 community-dwelling elderly men who had undergone hip fracture repair between 1998 and 2003 reported that GA was related to a significantly higher risk of mortality. This study was limited because it included only male patients. A meta-analysis of 141 trials involving 9,559 patients28  reported that the overall mortality was approximately 30% lower in patients given an NA. However, this finding is insecure because of possible selection biases, one of the inherited limitations of meta-analyses,29,30  in the subgroups in which this outcome was measured. To verify this controversial finding, larger studies may be required.31 
Some studies12,14,32,33  do not report that an NA is associated with lower mortality. For instance, a longitudinal observational study32  that evaluated the effects of anesthetic technique on the outcomes of elderly patients after a hip fracture repair found no significant differences in postoperative mortality or morbidity for geriatric patients given an NA or a GA. However, anesthetic drugs, perioperative hemodynamic monitoring and management, and pain control have recently improved34–36 ; therefore, a new assessment of this question seems not only a good idea but also a necessary topic of research.
A recent retrospective study21  of 18,158 cases of hip fracture repair reported that using an NA rather than a GA was significantly associated with lower adjusted ORs for mortality and pulmonary complications. Moreover, in the subgroup analyses, they demonstrated that an NA was associated with improved survival and fewer pulmonary complications in patients with extracapsular fractures but not in patients with intracapsular fractures. However, in our study, we did not find fracture type–related outcome differences between patients given an NA and those given a GA. Regardless of whether the hip fracture was intracapsular or extracapsular, GA-group patients always had a higher OR for in-hospital mortality, respiratory failure, ICU admission, and the need for ventilator support than did NA-group patients. Our study, which contains almost six times as many patients after propensity score matching, yielded a somewhat different finding on this point. Because of our study’s large sample size and small selection bias, its statistical power is more than ample to make finer discriminations than substantially smaller studies.
This is also the first retrospective study to report that a GA was associated with a higher rate of stroke than with an NA in geriatric patients who had undergone surgery for a femoral fracture. One possible explanation is that an NA is significantly more efficacious at inhibiting blood clot formation and reducing the incidence of DVT.37–39  DVT increases the risk of ischemic stroke for patients who have a patent foramen ovale, which is present in approximately 15 to 25% of the adult population.40–43  Systemic migration of emboli to the brain might also pass through extracardiac right-to-left shunts and result in stroke.44,45 
Interestingly, in our subgroup analyses, an NA was associated with a lower risk of acute stroke only in patients with an extracapsular fracture, but not in patients with an intracapsular fracture. Extracapsular fractures have higher rates of postoperative DVT than do intracapsular fractures.46  However, the risk of postoperative stroke between extracapsular and intracapsular fractures is never reported.
Another new finding of the current study is the association of in-hospital stroke with both the type of anesthesia and the hospital level. For patients treated in a medical center or local hospital, the odds for an acute stroke were not significantly different between the GA and NA groups. However, for patients treated in a regional hospital, the GA group had a higher risk for an in-hospital stroke. We urge additional study to confirm this finding.
Other findings of the current study were that the GA group was associated with higher odds of respiratory failure and had a higher ICU admission rate, a greater need for ventilator support, and more frequent prolonged hospital stays. However, a recent prospective study47  of 194 patients who underwent internal fixation for intertrochanteric hip fractures between 2005 and 2010 found no significant differences in the number of wound infections or LOHSs. Because our sample was much larger than the sample in that study, a significant difference was revealed. Although it was merely a mean of 0.31 days longer (10.77 vs. 10.44 days), we think this is clinically important and cannot be overlooked because it ultimately translates into a vast amount of extra and perhaps unnecessary medical resources, both human and financial. In our study, medical costs were NT$12,112 (approximately US$403) lower per person for patients given an NA. Because medical costs are increasing worldwide, the economic aspect of health care is especially important for governments that provide NHI.
Limitations
Our findings need to be interpreted in the context of some inherent limitations of administrative datasets.
First, with cross-sectional analyses, it is not possible to determine the temporal relation between surgery and observed events. However, from standard clinical practice, the probability of a patient being hospitalized because of an AMI, a stroke, respiratory failure, or renal failure and then to have to undergo hip fracture repair surgery immediately after treatment for one of these acute diseases during the same admission is very low.
Second, identifying these cases, comorbidities, and complications was completely dependent upon the correctness of the ICD-9-CM coding. These codes were reviewed and validated by auditors of medical records for the insurance system to ensure the accuracy of the claims. However, the NHI started using the ICD-9-CM coding scheme in 2000. Diagnoses in the NHIRD before 2000 used the “A-code” system from 1997 to 1999; therefore, codes used before 2000 may misclassify some diseases and conditions.
Third, although propensity score matching was used to reduce the selection bias, we still cannot entirely exclude the possibility that unobserved differences may have existed between the groups. For instance, individual data for lifestyle behaviors, cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking habits, body mass index, the severity of comorbid and preoperative functional disabilities, and ASA physical status are not available in the NHIRD. Therefore, we could not adjust for these variables as contributing factors in the propensity score model. However, we used the CCI as a surrogate for the ASA physical status: a satisfactory correlation of their ability to predict complications and mortality has recently been reported.24  Moreover, the details of intraoperative hemodynamics, such as body temperature change, blood pressure stability, and cardiac output fluctuations, are also lacking, which might affect the analyses of complications and mortality to some extent.
Fourth, because we worried that preoperative stroke, AMI, renal failure, and respiratory failure would confound our analysis, all hip fracture repair surgery patients who had these conditions before this hospitalization were excluded from this study; therefore, our results might not be generalizable to all geriatric patients. Because our study population was mainly ethnic Chinese, not all of our results will be directly generalizable to other ethnic groups.
Fifth, the NHI did not cover any postoperative continuous regional analgesia technique for pain control; therefore, we did not know how many patients continuously underwent postoperative regional analgesia. The benefits of an NA over a GA might actually have come from postoperative analgesia rather than from the choice of the type of anesthetic itself.
Conclusions
We conclude that for geriatric patients undergoing hip repair surgery, an NA rather than a GA has several advantages: NAs are associated with lower incidences of and risks for the adverse in-hospital outcomes of stroke, respiratory failure, and death. Moreover, the ICU admission rate, LOHSs, and total medical costs are also lower for patients given an NA.
Acknowledgments
This study is based on the data from the National Health Insurance Research Database provided by the Taiwan Bureau of National Health Insurance, Department of Health, Taipei, Taiwan, and managed by the National Health Research Institutes (Zhunan, Miaoli County, Taiwan). The authors thank Bill Franke, M.A. (Tainan, Taiwan), for proofreading and editing the article.
This work was supported by a grant from the Chi Mei Medical Center (grant no. 9964), Tainan, Taiwan.
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
References
Qu, B, Ma, Y, Yan, M, Wu, HH, Fan, L, Liao, DF, Pan, XM, Hong, Z The economic burden of fracture patients with osteoporosis in western China.. Osteoporos Int. (2014). 25 1853–60 [Article] [PubMed]
Duclos, A, Couray-Targe, S, Randrianasolo, M, Hedoux, S, Couris, CM, Colin, C, Schott, AM Burden of hip fracture on inpatient care: A before and after population-based study.. Osteoporos Int. (2010). 21 1493–501 [Article] [PubMed]
Sahota, O, Morgan, N, Moran, CG The direct cost of acute hip fracture care in care home residents in the UK.. Osteoporos Int. (2012). 23 917–20 [Article] [PubMed]
Burge, R, Dawson-Hughes, B, Solomon, DH, Wong, JB, King, A, Tosteson, A Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005–2025.. J Bone Miner Res. (2007). 22 465–75 [Article] [PubMed]
Beaupre, LA, Jones, CA, Saunders, LD, Johnston, DW, Buckingham, J, Majumdar, SR Best practices for elderly hip fracture patients. A systematic overview of the evidence.. J Gen Intern Med. (2005). 20 1019–25 [Article] [PubMed]
Wiktorowicz, ME, Goeree, R, Papaioannou, A, Adachi, JD, Papadimitropoulos, E Economic implications of hip fracture: Health service use, institutional care and cost in Canada.. Osteoporos Int. (2001). 12 271–8 [Article] [PubMed]
Hu, F, Jiang, C, Shen, J, Tang, P, Wang, Y Preoperative predictors for mortality following hip fracture surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.. Injury. (2012). 43 676–85 [Article] [PubMed]
Hamlet, WP, Lieberman, JR, Freedman, EL, Dorey, FJ, Fletcher, A, Johnson, EE Influence of health status and the timing of surgery on mortality in hip fracture patients.. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). (1997). 26 621–7 [PubMed]
Roche, JJ, Wenn, RT, Sahota, O, Moran, CG Effect of comorbidities and postoperative complications on mortality after hip fracture in elderly people: Prospective observational cohort study.. BMJ. (2005). 331 1374–8 [Article] [PubMed]
Ho, CA, Li, CY, Hsieh, KS, Chen, HF Factors determining the 1-year survival after operated hip fracture: A hospital-based analysis.. J Orthop Sci. (2010). 15 30–7 [Article] [PubMed]
Luger, TJ, Kammerlander, C, Gosch, M, Luger, MF, Kammerlander-Knauer, U, Roth, T, Kreutziger, J Neuroaxial versus general anaesthesia in geriatric patients for hip fracture surgery: Does it matter?. Osteoporos Int. (2010). 21suppl 4 S555–72 [Article] [PubMed]
O’Hara, DA, Duff, A, Berlin, JA, Poses, RM, Lawrence, VA, Huber, EC, Noveck, H, Strom, BL, Carson, JL The effect of anesthetic technique on postoperative outcomes in hip fracture repair.. Anesthesiology. (2000). 92 947–57 [Article] [PubMed]
Urwin, SC, Parker, MJ, Griffiths, R General versus regional anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.. Br J Anaesth. (2000). 84 450–5 [Article] [PubMed]
Le-Wendling, L, Bihorac, A, Baslanti, TO, Lucas, S, Sadasivan, K, Wendling, A, Heyman, HJ, Boezaart, A Regional anesthesia as compared with general anesthesia for surgery in geriatric patients with hip fracture: Does it decrease morbidity, mortality, and health care costs? Results of a single-centered study.. Pain Med. (2012). 13 948–56 [Article] [PubMed]
Macfarlane, AJ, Prasad, GA, Chan, VW, Brull, R Does regional anaesthesia improve outcome after total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review.. Br J Anaesth. (2009). 103 335–45 [Article] [PubMed]
Parker, MJ, Handoll, HH, Griffiths, R Anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults.. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2004). 4 CD000521 [PubMed]
Bigler, D, Adelhøj, B, Petring, OU, Pederson, NO, Busch, P, Kalhke, P Mental function and morbidity after acute hip surgery during spinal and general anaesthesia.. Anaesthesia. (1985). 40 672–6 [Article] [PubMed]
Brown, AG, Visram, AR, Jones, RD, Irwin, MG, Bacon-Shone, J Preoperative and postoperative oxygen saturation in the elderly following spinal or general anaesthesia—An audit of current practice.. Anaesth Intensive Care. (1994). 22 150–4 [PubMed]
Davis, FM, Woolner, DF, Frampton, C, Wilkinson, A, Grant, A, Harrison, RT, Roberts, MT, Thadaka, R Prospective, multi-centre trial of mortality following general or spinal anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in the elderly.. Br J Anaesth. (1987). 59 1080–8 [Article] [PubMed]
Radcliff, TA, Henderson, WG, Stoner, TJ, Khuri, SF, Dohm, M, Hutt, E Patient risk factors, operative care, and outcomes among older community-dwelling male veterans with hip fracture.. J Bone Joint Surg Am. (2008). 90 34–42 [Article] [PubMed]
Neuman, MD, Silber, JH, Elkassabany, NM, Ludwig, JM, Fleisher, LA Comparative effectiveness of regional versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults.. Anesthesiology. (2012). 117 72–92 [Article] [PubMed]
Arai, H, Ouchi, Y, Yokode, M, Ito, H, Uematsu, H, Eto, F, Oshima, S, Ota, K, Saito, Y, Sasaki, H, Tsubota, K, Fukuyama, H, Honda, Y, Iguchi, A, Toba, K, Hosoi, T, Kita, T Members of Subcommittee for Aging, Toward the realization of a better aged society: Messages from gerontology and geriatrics.. Geriatr Gerontol Int. (2012). 12 16–22 [Article] [PubMed]
Deyo, RA, Cherkin, DC, Ciol, MA Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases.. J Clin Epidemiol. (1992). 45 613–9 [Article] [PubMed]
Whitmore, RG, Stephen, JH, Vernick, C, Campbell, PG, Yadla, S, Ghobrial, GM, Maltenfort, MG, Ratliff, JK ASA grade and Charlson Comorbidity Index of spinal surgery patients: Correlation with complications and societal costs.. Spine J. (2014). 14 31–8 [Article] [PubMed]
Hung, TC, Lai, YF, Tseng, CW, Hong, YH, Shi, HY Trend analysis of hospital resource utilization for prolonged mechanical ventilation patients in Taiwan: A population-based study.. Respir Care. (2013). 58 669–75 [Article] [PubMed]
Parsons, LS Ovation Research Group, Performing a 1:N Case-Control Match on Propensity Score. Proceedings of the 29th SAS Users Group International, Montreal, Canada. (2004).  pp 1–11
Austin, PC Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.. Stat Med. (2009). 28 3083–107 [Article] [PubMed]
Rodgers, A, Walker, N, Schug, S, McKee, A, Kehlet, H, van Zundert, A, Sage, D, Futter, M, Saville, G, Clark, T, MacMahon, S Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: Results from overview of randomised trials.. BMJ. (2000). 321 1493–505 [Article] [PubMed]
Walker, E, Hernandez, AV, Kattan, MW Meta-analysis: Its strengths and limitations.. Cleve Clin J Med. (2008). 75 431–9 [Article] [PubMed]
Stevens, RD, Wu, CL Strengths and limitations of meta-analysis.. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. (2007). 21 1–2 [Article] [PubMed]
Flather, MD, Farkouh, ME, Pogue, JM, Yusuf, S Strengths and limitations of meta-analysis: Larger studies may be more reliable.. Control Clin Trials. (1997). 18 568–79; discussion 661–6 [Article] [PubMed]
Gilbert, TB, Hawkes, WG, Hebel, JR, Hudson, JI, Kenzora, JE, Zimmerman, SI, Felsenthal, G, Magaziner, J Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for hip fracture repair: A longitudinal observation of 741 elderly patients during 2-year follow-up.. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). (2000). 29 25–35 [PubMed]
Juelsgaard, P, Sand, NP, Felsby, S, Dalsgaard, J, Jakobsen, KB, Brink, O, Carlsson, PS, Thygesen, K Perioperative myocardial ischaemia in patients undergoing surgery for fractured hip randomized to incremental spinal, single-dose spinal or general anaesthesia.. Eur J Anaesthesiol. (1998). 15 656–63 [Article] [PubMed]
Kehlet, H, Wilmore, DW Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome.. Am J Surg. (2002). 183 630–41 [Article] [PubMed]
Tanaka, KA, Bader, SO, Görlinger, K Novel approaches in management of perioperative coagulopathy.. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. (2014). 27 72–80 [Article] [PubMed]
Argoff, CE Recent management advances in acute postoperative pain.. Pain Pract. (2014). 14 477–87 [PubMed]
Modig, J, Hjelmstedt, A, Sahlstedt, B, Maripuu, E Comparative influences of epidural and general anaesthesia on deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism after total hip replacement.. Acta Chir Scand. (1981). 147 125–30 [PubMed]
McKenzie, PJ, Wishart, HY, Gray, I, Smith, G Effects of anaesthetic technique on deep vein thrombosis. A comparison of subarachnoid and general anaesthesia.. Br J Anaesth. (1985). 57 853–7 [Article] [PubMed]
Moran, MC Benefits of epidural anesthesia over general anesthesia in the prevention of deep vein thrombosis following total hip arthroplasty.. J Arthroplasty. (1995). 10 405–6 [Article] [PubMed]
Lechat, P, Mas, JL, Lascault, G, Loron, P, Theard, M, Klimczac, M, Drobinski, G, Thomas, D, Grosgogeat, Y Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke.. N Engl J Med. (1988). 318 1148–52 [Article] [PubMed]
Consoli, D, Paciaroni, M, Aguggia, M, Melis, M, Malferrari, G, Vidale, S, Cerrato, P, Sacco, S, Gandolfo, C, Bovi, P, Serrati, C, Del Sette, M, Cavallini, A, Diomedi, M, Postorino, P, Ricci, S Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in ischemic stroke in Italy: The SISIFO study.. Neurol Sci. (2014). 35 867–73 [Article] [PubMed]
Kernan, WN, Ovbiagele, B, Black, HR, Bravata, DM, Chimowitz, MI, Ezekowitz, MD, Fang, MC, Fisher, M, Furie, KL, Heck, DV, Johnston, SC, Kasner, SE, Kittner, SJ, Mitchell, PH, Rich, MW, Richardson, D, Schwamm, LH, Wilson, JA American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: A guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.. Stroke. (2014). 45 2160–236 [Article] [PubMed]
Di Tullio, MR, Sacco, RL, Sciacca, RR, Jin, Z, Homma, S Patent foramen ovale and the risk of ischemic stroke in a multiethnic population.. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2007). 49 797–802 [Article] [PubMed]
Goutman, SA, Katzan, IL, Gupta, R Transcranial Doppler with bubble study as a method to detect extracardiac right-to-left shunts in patients with ischemic stroke.. J Neuroimaging. (2013). 23 523–5 [Article] [PubMed]
Ueno, Y, Iguchi, Y, Inoue, T, Shibazaki, K, Urabe, T, Kimura, K Paradoxical brain embolism may not be uncommon-prospective study in acute ischemic stroke.. J Neurol. (2007). 254 763–6 [Article] [PubMed]
McNamara, I, Sharma, A, Prevost, T, Parker, M Symptomatic venous thromboembolism following a hip fracture.. Acta Orthop. (2009). 80 687–92 [Article] [PubMed]
Rashid, RH, Shah, AA, Shakoor, A, Noordin, S Hip fracture surgery: Does type of anesthesia matter?. Biomed Res Int. (2013). 2013 252356 [PubMed]
Appendix 1: ICD-9 CM Codes Indicating Trauma
Appendix 2: Major Comorbidities and Corresponding ICD-9 CM Codes
Fig. 1.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
Fig. 1.
Flow chart of the creation of the study sample. GA = general anesthesia; NA = neuraxial anesthesia.
×
Table 1.
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery×
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Table 1.
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery
Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients Diagnosed with a Hip Fracture and Given Hip Repair Surgery×
×
Table 2.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 2.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes for 104,088 Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
Table 3.
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011×
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Table 3.
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011
Geriatric Patients Given a GA for Hip Surgery Were Associated with a Prolonged Hospital Stay and a Higher Total Cost Than Were Patients Given an NA: Taiwan, 1997–2011×
×
Table 4.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 4.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Intracapsular or Extracapsular Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
Table 5.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Table 5.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture Having Hip Surgery in Medical Center, Regional Hospital, or Local Hospital: Taiwan, 1997 and 2011×
×
Table 6.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan×
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Table 6.
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan
Associations between GA or NA and In-hospital Adverse Outcomes in Propensity Score–matched Patients Diagnosed with Hip Fracture and Given Hip Surgery between 1997 and 2004 and between 2005 and 2011 in Taiwan×
×