Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Our study evaluates financial impact to the Best Practice Tariff (BPT) of hip fracture patients on Novel Oral Anti-Coagulant (NOAC) medication. Since their approval by NICE for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, the incidence of hip fracture patients admitted to hospitals on NOAC medication (e.g. rivaroxiban, apixaban) has been increasing. BPT for hip fractures has two components: a base tariff and a conditional top-up tariff of £1,335 per patient (applied to patients of 60 years of age). For the top-up tariff, six criteria must be met, of which time-to-surgery within 36 hours is one. Our department currently recommends withholding NOAC medication and delaying surgery for at least 48 hours as per our Trust's haematology guidelines to reduce intra-operative bleeding risk. Therefore, the conditional top-up tariff cannot be claimed for these patients.
Method
A retrospective review of our Trust hip fracture patients over 60 years of age admitted during 2019 on NOAC medication using National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD).
Results
545 hip fracture patients had operative treatment at our Trust during the one-year period of 2019. 31 of these patients were admitted on NOAC medication, and therefore had to stop the NOAC and wait for at least 48 hours before having surgery. This translates to a potential hip fracture BPT loss of £41,385 in 2019, as the conditional top-up tariff could not be claimed.
Conclusion
This study illustrates the large financial impact to BPT that hip fracture patients admitted on NOAC medications has at our Trust. It raises the argument as to whether the BPT should allow for an increased length of time until surgery for such patients, to allow safe surgical treatment with reduced bleeding risk.
Declaration of Interest
(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
