Abstract
Background
National hip fracture programmes are becoming widespread, but this practice is nascent and varied. The Scottish Hip Fracture Audit (SHFA) was an early adopter of this strategy and is credited with substantial systemic improvements in quality and outcomes.
Objectives
To provide evidence and incentive to clinicians and administrators to adopt successful improvement strategies, and to facilitate data-driven change hip fracture care.
Study Design and Methods
We reviewed the practice of seven national hip fracture improvement programmes in: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Scotland, and Ireland. We report our experience from the SHFA and describe: the results of our programme; challenges and learning points encountered, and successful strategies for implementing change.
Results
There is variance in approach to data collection and reporting, for example: standalone programmes versus combined trauma and arthroplasty registries; annual trend reporting versus ‘snapshot’ or real-time information; population-level versus patient-level data, and the emphasis placed on service-level characteristics. The governance model also varies – some act as a passive data registry whereas others act as active agents of change and regulation. There is consensus on the key performance makers: prompt admission; early surgery and mobilisation, and a multidisciplinary approach. There have been significant challenges encountered by the SHFA with respect to funding, logistical, and political issues. Analysis of the effects of our programme have demonstrated its clinical efficacy, and has identified successful strategies for improvement. We describe this experience.
Conclusions
The establishment of national audit programmes has resulted in significant improvements in quality, efficiency, and outcomes. This study of major national programmes provides evidence, incentive, and instruction to clinicians and administrators who seek to improve healthcare systems.
