↓ Skip to main content

A Resident‐led Initiative Improves Screening and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency in Patients with Hip Fractures

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
A Resident‐led Initiative Improves Screening and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency in Patients with Hip Fractures
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-5036-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Drew A Lansdown, Amanda Whitaker, Rosanna Wustrack, Aenor Sawyer, Erik N Hansen

Abstract

Acute hip fractures carry a high risk of morbidity and are associated with low vitamin D levels. Improvements in screening and treating low vitamin D levels may lead to lower fall rates and a lower likelihood of additional fragility fractures. However, patients with low vitamin D levels often remain unassessed and untreated, even after they experience these fractures. We wished to determine whether a resident-led initiative can improve (1) screening for and (2) treatment of vitamin D deficiency in patients with acute hip fractures. Our department initiated a housestaff-led, quality improvement project focused on screening and treating vitamin D deficiency in patients with acute hip fractures. Screening encompassed checking serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level during the acute hospitalization, and treating was defined as starting supplementation before discharge when the serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level was less than 30 ng/mL. To evaluate the efficacy of this program, an administrative database identified 283 patients treated surgically for an acute hip fracture between July 2010 and June 2014. This period included 2 years before program initiation (Year 1, n = 65 patients; Year 2, n = 61 patients), the initial program year (Year 3, n = 66 patients), and the subsequent program year (Year 4, n = 91 patients). Followup was extended to 6 weeks after treatment with 9.2% (26/282) of patients lost to followup. Eight patients were excluded owing to documented intolerance of vitamin D supplementation. There were no differences regarding patient demographics, fracture type, or treatment rendered across these 4 years. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients screened and treated for vitamin D deficiency. The secondary endpoint was the continuation of vitamin D supplementation at the patient's 6 week followup, according to the patient's medication list at that visit. This analysis included all patients, assuming those lost to followup had not continued supplementation. ANOVA and chi-square tests were used to evaluate the differences in demographic data and in screening and treating rates. Screening for vitamin D deficiency improved after initiation of the resident-led quality improvement program, with screening performed for 31% of patients in Year 1 (20/65; odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.75), 20% of patients in Year 2 (12/61; OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.13-0.46), 46% of patients in Year 3 (30/66; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.51-1.35), and 88% of patients in Year 4 (80/91; OR, 7.27; 95% CI, 3.87-13.7) (p < 0.001). Vitamin D supplementation was initiated for 33% of patients in Year 1 (21/63; OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.30-0.84), 28% in Year 2 (17/61; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22-0.68), 50% in Year 3 (32/64; OR,1.00; 95% CI, 0.61-1.63), and 76% in Year 4 (65/86; OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.89-5.06) (p < 0.001). At early postoperative followup, we saw substantial improvement in the proportion of patients who continued receiving vitamin D supplementation: Year 1, 12% (8/64; OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.30); Year 2, 15% (9/61; OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.35); Year 3, 26% (16/64; OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.59); and Year 4, 46% (40/86; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.33) (p < 0.001). Implementation of a resident-led quality improvement program resulted in higher rates of screening and treating vitamin D deficiency for patients with acute hip fractures. Housestaff-based initiatives may be an effective way to improve care processes that target improvements in bone health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 10 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 20%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2019.
All research outputs
#4,806,375
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1,053
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,638
of 355,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#25
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.