Assessment of outcome after hip fracture: development of a universal assessment system for hip fractures

Thomas M Bowers, Martyn J Parker, Thomas M Bowers, Martyn J Parker

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to refine current evaluation systems used to assess outcome after a hip fracture and to devise a simple and practical system to assess all hip fracture patients.

Methods: Three continuous scales were defined for pain, mobility and functional independence. These were all found to have an acceptable degree of inter-observer agreement. The pre-fracture mobility and independence scores were related to the one-year mortality for a consecutive series of 381 patients.

Results: Scores for mobility and functional independence were highly predictive of mortality (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: It is recommended that the outcome after hip fracture should be standardised to these principle outcomes of pain, regain of mobility and independence and mortality. These scores can be use to assess progress and identify those who may require additional assessment or intervention.

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2016.

References

    1. Hoang-Kim A, Beaton D, Bhandari M, Kulkani AV, Schemitsch E (2013) The need to standardise functional outcome in randomised trials of hip fracture. J Orthop Trauma 27(1), e1–e8.
    1. Ranhoff AH, Holvik K, Martinsen MI, Domaas K, Solheim LF (2010) Older hip fracture patients: three groups with different needs. BMC Geriatr 18(10), 65.
    1. Seitz DP, Adunuri N, Gill SS, Rochon PA (2011) Prevalence of dementia and cognitive impairment among older adults with hip fractures. J Am Med Dir Assoc 12(8), 556–564.
    1. Gruber-Baldini AL, Zimmerman S, Morrison RS et al. (2003) Cognitive impairment in hip fracture patients: timing of detection and longitudinal follow-up. J Am Geriatr Soc 51(9), 1227–1236.
    1. Seymour DG, Ball AE, Russell EM, Primrose WR, Garratt AM, Crawford JR (2001) Problems in using health survey questionnaires in older patients with physical disabilities. The reliability and validity of the SF-36 and the effect of cognitive impairment. J Eval Clin Pract 7(4), 411–418.
    1. Mallinson S (1998) The Short-Form 36 and older people: some problems encountered when using postal administration. J Epidemiol Community Health 52(5), 324–328.
    1. McGrory BJ, Shinar AA, Freiberg AA, Harris WH (1997) Enhancement of the value of hip questionnaires by telephone follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 12(3), 340–343.
    1. McVay MR, Kelley KR, Mathews DL, Jackson RJ, Kokoska ER, Smith SD (2008) Postoperative follow-up: is a phone call enough? J Pediatr Surg 43(1), 83–86.
    1. Parker MJ, Palmer CR (1993) A new mobility score for predicting mortality after hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg 75-B, 797–798.
    1. Kristensen MT, Bandholm T, Foss NB, Ekdahl C, Kehlet H (2008) High inter-tester reliability of the new mobility score in patients with hip fracture. J Rehabil Med 40, 589–591.
    1. Parker MJ, Palmer CR (1995) Prediction of rehabilitation after hip fracture. Age Ageing 24, 96–98.
    1. Charnley J (1972) The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 54, 61–76.
    1. Svanholm H, Starklint H, Gundersen HJG, Fabricius J, Barlebo H, Olsen S (1989) Reproducibility of histomorphologic diagnosis with special reference to kappa statistic. APMIS 97, 689–698.
    1. Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 51-A, 737–749.
    1. Apley AG (1990) An assessment of assessment. J Bone Joint Surg 72-B, 957–958.
    1. Parker MJ, Maheshwer CB (1997) Hip score of no value for assessing the results of proximal femoral fracture treatment. Int Orthop 21, 262–264.
    1. Arinzon Z, Gepstein R, Shabat S, Berner Y (2007) Pain perception during the rehabilitation phase following traumatic hip fracture in the elderly is an important prognostic factor and treatment tool. Disabil Rehabil 29(8), 651–658.
    1. Diver AJ, Craig BF (2005) Admission proforma significantly improves the medical record. SMJ 50(3), 101–102.
    1. Nymark T, Lauritsen JM, Ovesen O, Rock ND, Jeune B (2003) Short time-frame from first to second hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 14, 1028–1034.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir