Johanniter-Krankenhaus Geesthacht GmbH

To the hospital’s home page
Back to the list of treatment areas

Quality results

Treatment sector: Femoral neck fracture: surgery as a result of a fracture with fixation of the broken bone parts by a metal connection (17/1) Explanation

Information about this treatment area (documentation)

Designation	Hüftgelenknahe Femurfraktur
Shortcut	17/1
Number of cases	58
Documentation rate	101.72 %
Hospital comment	Die Dokumentationsrate wurde krankenhausbezogen berechnet.. Hinweis: Für das Berichtsjahr 2020 sind die Dokumentationsraten nur eingeschränkt aussagekräftig, da sich im Erfassungsjahr 2020 Unterschreitungen der Dokumentationsrate in Folge der COVID-19-Pandemie ergeben können, die als unverschuldet zu werten sind.

Summary result:

In 5 of 5 quality characteristics, the quality objective was achieved.
No assessment is possible for one quality characteristic

Number of patients treated: 58

Quality objective achieved
Quality objective not achieved

The results in detail

Show national result

Quality criterion

Hospital result
and target area

Quality objective
achieved?

All information

Waiting time in hospital before surgery due to a fracture in the upper part of the femur, where the broken bone parts were fixed using a metal splice

Hospital: 11,86 %

Target area: at most 15,00 %

Quality objective achieved

Click here

Preventive measures to prevent the patient from falling after the operation

Hospital: 100,00 %

Target area: at least 90,00 %

Quality objective achieved

Click here

Ratio of the actual number to the previously expected number of patients who could not walk 50 metres when discharged from hospital (individual risks of the patients were taken into account)

Hospital: 1,31

Target area: at most 2,16

Quality objective achieved

Click here

Complications (e.g. post-operative bleeding, implant defects and wound infections) directly related to the operation (related to operations performed as a result of a fracture in the upper part of the femur, where the fractured bone parts were fixed using a metal splice)

Hospital: 0,00 %

Target area: at most 5,44 %

Quality objective achieved

Click here

Ratio of the actual number to the previously expected number of patients with complications (e.g. urinary tract infections, pneumonia or thromboses) that are only indirectly related to the operation (related to operations as a result of a fracture in the upper part of the femur, where the fractured bone parts are fixed by a metal splice - individual risks of the patients were taken into account)

Hospital: 1,70

Target area: at most 2,26

Quality objective achieved

Click here

The quality characteristics not included in the summary result (see above) because an evaluation is not provided here:

The results in detail

Show national result

Quality criterion

Hospital result

Quality objective
achieved?

All information

Ratio of the actual number to the previously expected number of patients who died during their hospital stay (the individual risks of the patients were taken into account)

Hospital: 1,47

No information due to data protection

No assessment foreseen

Click here

Code ID	54030
Result (%)	11,86
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	59
Events observed	7
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result (%)	11,11
Target range (reference range)	<= 15,00 %
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	10,86 - 11,36
Hospital confidence interval (%)	4,85 - 22,92
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG "The reference range indicates the range in which the results of an indicator are assessed as normal. A facility with a result outside the reference range is initially noticeable in terms of calculation, which usually results in an analysis in the structured dialog. It should be noted that an indicator result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a poor quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also e.g. be traceable to incorrect documentation or to individual cases. Quality is assessed in the context of the structured dialogue with the institutions. The results of this quality indicator can only be compared with the previous year's results to a limited extent due to adjustments to the calculation rule of the indicator. Further information on the adjustments made can be found in the description of the quality indicators at the following link; https://iqtig.org/qs-verfahren/."

Code ID	54050
Result (%)	100,00
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	49
Events observed	49
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result (%)	97,30
Target range (reference range)	>= 90,00 %
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	97,16 - 97,44
Hospital confidence interval (%)	92,75 - 100,00
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG

Code ID	54033
Result	1,31
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	39
Events observed	9
Anticipated events	6,88
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result	1,01
Target range (reference range)	<= 2,16 (95. Perzentil)
Confidence interval nationwide	0,99 - 1,03
Hospital confidence interval	0,72 - 2,17
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG "This indicator is a risk-adjusted indicator. A risk adjustment compensates for the different composition of the patient groups from different institutions. This leads to a fairer comparison, since there are patient-related risk factors (such as comorbidities) that systematically influence the indicator result without an institution being responsible for e.g. B. the following more frequent complications can be attributed. For example, the indicator result of a facility with many high-risk cases can be compared more statistically with the result of a facility with many low-risk cases. The risk factors are compiled from patient characteristics that were classified as risk-relevant as part of the development of quality indicators and which can be practically documented. The reference range indicates the range in which the results of an indicator are assessed as normal. A facility with a result outside the reference range is initially noticeable in terms of calculation, which usually results in an analysis in the structured dialog. It should be noted that an indicator result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a poor quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also e.g. be traceable to incorrect documentation or to individual cases. Quality is assessed in the context of the structured dialogue with the institutions. The results of this quality indicator can only be compared with the previous year's results to a limited extent due to adjustments to the calculation rule of the indicator. Further information on the adjustments made can be found in the description of the quality indicators at the following link; https://iqtig.org/qs-verfahren/."

Code ID	54029
Result (%)	0,00
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	59
Events observed	0
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
National result (%)	1,89
Target range (reference range)	<= 5,44 % (95. Perzentil)
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	1,79 - 2,01
Hospital confidence interval (%)	0,00 - 6,06
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG It should be noted that this computational result may not be influenced exclusively by the respective institution. So e.g. the disease severity or concomitant diseases of the patients have an influence on the result. The reference range indicates the range in which the results of an indicator are assessed as normal. A facility with a result outside the reference range is initially computationally conspicuous, which usually results in an analysis in the structured dialog. It should be noted that an indicator result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a poor quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also e.g. be traceable to incorrect documentation or to individual cases. Quality is assessed in the context of the structured dialogue with the institutions.

Code ID	54042
Result	1,70
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	59
Events observed	8
Anticipated events	4,69
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result	1,01
Target range (reference range)	<= 2,26 (95. Perzentil)
Confidence interval nationwide	0,98 - 1,03
Hospital confidence interval	0,88 - 3,08
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG This indicator is a risk-adjusted indicator. A risk adjustment compensates for the different composition of the patient groups from different institutions. This leads to a fairer comparison, as there are patient-related risk factors (such as comorbidities) that systematically influence the indicator result without an institution being responsible for e.g. B. the following more frequent complications can be attributed. For example, the indicator result of a facility with many high-risk cases can be compared more statistically with the result of a facility with many low-risk cases. The risk factors are compiled from patient characteristics that were classified as risk-relevant as part of the development of quality indicators and which can be practically documented. The reference range indicates the range in which the results of an indicator are assessed as normal. A facility with a result outside the reference range is initially computationally conspicuous, which usually results in an analysis in the structured dialog. It should be noted that an indicator result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a poor quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also e.g. be traceable to incorrect documentation or to individual cases. Quality is assessed in the context of the structured dialogue with the institutions.

Code ID	54046
Result	1,47
Evaluation through structured dialogue	A target area was not defined for this quality criterion because an evaluation is not intended for technical reasons. (N02)
Population
Events observed
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
Comparison with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
National result	1,03
Target range (reference range)	Nicht definiert
Confidence interval nationwide	0,99 - 1,07
Hospital confidence interval	0,51 - 4,04
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	QSKH
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG "This indicator is a risk-adjusted indicator. A risk adjustment compensates for the different composition of the patient groups from different institutions. This leads to a fairer comparison, as there are patient-related risk factors (such as comorbidities) that systematically influence the indicator result without an institution being responsible for e.g. B. the following more frequent complications can be attributed. For example, the indicator result of a facility with many high-risk cases can be compared more statistically with the result of a facility with many low-risk cases. The risk factors are compiled from patient characteristics that were classified as risk-relevant as part of the development of quality indicators and which can be practically documented. The reference range indicates the range in which the results of an indicator are assessed as normal. A facility with a result outside the reference range is initially computationally conspicuous, which usually results in an analysis in the structured dialog. It should be noted that an indicator result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a poor quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also e.g. be traceable to incorrect documentation or to individual cases. Quality is assessed in the context of the structured dialogue with the institutions. The results of this quality indicator can only be compared to the previous year's results to a limited extent due to adjustments to the calculation rule of the indicator. Further information on the adjustments made can be found in the description of the quality indicators at the following link; https://iqtig.org/qs-verfahren/."