Loading…
Retrospective Evaluation of a Restrictive Transfusion Strategy in Older Adults with Hip Fracture
Objectives To compare the association between a restrictive transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications during hospitalization for hip fracture with the association between a liberal transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications, accounting for all transfusions from the emergency d...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) 2018-07, Vol.66 (6), p.1151-1157 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Objectives
To compare the association between a restrictive transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications during hospitalization for hip fracture with the association between a liberal transfusion strategy and cardiovascular complications, accounting for all transfusions from the emergency department to postacute rehabilitation settings.
Design
Retrospective study.
Setting
Perioperative geriatric care unit.
Participants
All individuals aged 70 and older admitted to the emergency department for hip fracture and hospitalized in our perioperative geriatric care unit (N=667; n=193 in the liberal transfusion group, n=474 in the restrictive transfusion group) from July 2009 to April 2016.
Intervention
A restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin level threshold ≥8 g/dL or symptoms) used from January 2012 to April 2016 was compared with the liberal transfusion strategy (hemoglobin level threshold ≥10 g/dL) used from July 2009 to December 2011.
Measurements
Primary endpoint was in‐hospital acute cardiovascular complications (heart failure, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation or stroke).
Results
The change to a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with fewer acute cardiovascular complications (odds ratio=0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.31–0.67, p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-8614 1532-5415 |
DOI: | 10.1111/jgs.15371 |