The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative Effectiveness of Regional versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery in Adults
Open accessAbstract
Background: Hip fracture is a common, morbid, and costly event among older adults. Data are inconclusive as to whether epidural or spinal (regional) anesthesia improves outcomes after hip fracture surgery. Methods: The authors examined a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture in 126 hospitals in New York in 2007 and 2008. They tested the association of a record indicating receipt of regional versus general anesthesia with a primary outcome of inpatient mortality and with secondary outcomes of pulmonary and cardiovascular complications using hospital fixed-effects logistic regressions. Subgroup analyses tested the association of anesthesia type and outcomes according to fracture anatomy. Results: Of 18,158 patients, 5,254 (29%) received regional anesthesia. In-hospital mortality occurred in 435 (2.4%). Unadjusted rates of mortality and cardiovascular complications did not differ by anesthesia type. Patients receiving regional anesthesia experienced fewer pulmonary complications (359 [6.8%] vs. 1,040 [8.1%], P < 0.005). Regional anesthesia was associated with a lower adjusted odds of mortality (odds ratio: 0.710, 95% CI 0.541, 0.932, P = 0.014) and pulmonary complications (odds ratio: 0.752, 95% CI 0.637, 0.887, P < 0.0001) relative to general anesthesia. In subgroup analyses, regional anesthesia was associated with improved survival and fewer pulmonary complications among patients with intertrochanteric fractures but not among patients with femoral neck fractures. Conclusions: Regional anesthesia is associated with a lower odds of inpatient mortality and pulmonary complications among all hip fracture patients compared with general anesthesia; this finding may be driven by a trend toward improved outcomes with regional anesthesia among patients with intertrochanteric fractures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data.
Elixhauser, A., Steiner, C., Harris, D. R., & Coffey, R. M. (1998) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199801000-00004 · Cited by 9,921
Design of Observational Studies
Rosenbaum, P. R. (2010) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1213-8 · Cited by 1,150
Failure-to-Rescue: Comparing Definitions to Measure Quality of Care
Silber, J. H., Romano, P. S., Rosen, A. K., Wang, Y., Even-Shoshan, O., & Volpp, K. G. (2007) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e31812e01cc · Cited by 333
Self-citation
Cited by
Spinal Anesthesia or General Anesthesia for Hip Surgery in Older Adults
Neuman, M. D., Feng, R., Carson, J. L., Gaskins, L. J., Dillane, D., Sessler, D. I., Sieber, F., Magaziner, J., Marcantonio, E. R., Mehta, S., et al. (2021) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2113514 · Cited by 478
Self-citationSankar, A., Dixon, P. R., Sivanathan, L., Memtsoudis, S. G., de Almeida, J. R., & Singh, M. (2020) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000003429 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Neuman, M. D., Silber, J. H., Elkassabany, N. M., Ludwig, J. M., & Fleisher, L. A.
- Venue
- Anesthesiology
- Published
- 2012-07-01
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 72-92
- ISSN
- 0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2132847842
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 25.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative Effectiveness of Regional versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery in Adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/aln.0b013e3182545e7c
- The paper
- Neuman, M. D., Silber, J. H., Elkassabany, N. M., Ludwig, J. M., & Fleisher, L. A. (2012). Comparative Effectiveness of Regional versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery in Adults. Anesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0b013e3182545e7c
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.