OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing length of stay and mortality in first and second hip fractures. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study with data analysis. SETTING: The study was conducted at a level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Six hundred and seventy-two patients treated for hip fractures (OTA 31-A, 31-B, 32-A1.1) over 30 months were split into 2 groups. 1FG: Six hundred and ten patients (90.8%) suffered a fracture for the first time. 2FG: Sixty-two patients (9.2%) had previously sustained contralateral fractures. INTERVENTION: Dynamic hip screws or cephalomedullary nails (31-A fractures); cephalomedullary nails (32-A1.1); dynamic hip screws or cannulated screws (undisplaced 31-B fractures); and hemiarthroplasty (displaced 31-B fractures) were used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative lengths of stay on trauma ward (LOS-T) on the rehabilitation unit (LOS-R) and in hospital (LOS-H) were calculated. Dates of death were recorded. Event analysis and structural equation modeling were used to assess the impact of second fractures, fracture types, age, gender, and ASA grades on these. RESULTS: : The 2 groups were comparable in gender distribution, ASA grades, fracture types, LOS, and mortality at 120 days. 2FG patients were older than 1FG (mean 83.3 vs 80.2 years) with a higher proportion being discharged to institutional care (35.5% vs 18.5%). Event modeling analysis showed that LOS-T was dependent on ASA grade, whereas mortality was dependent on ASA grade, age, and gender. Second fractures were not related to the risks of increased LOS-T, LOS-R, and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Second fractures per se do not increase the risk of longer postoperative stay or higher mortality. Any observed effect on these outcomes in second fractures represents the influence of increasing age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing length of stay and mortality in first and second hip fractures. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study with data analysis. SETTING: The study was conducted at a level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Six hundred and seventy-two patients treated for hip fractures (OTA 31-A, 31-B, 32-A1.1) over 30 months were split into 2 groups. 1FG: Six hundred and ten patients (90.8%) suffered a fracture for the first time. 2FG: Sixty-two patients (9.2%) had previously sustained contralateral fractures. INTERVENTION: Dynamic hip screws or cephalomedullary nails (31-A fractures); cephalomedullary nails (32-A1.1); dynamic hip screws or cannulated screws (undisplaced 31-B fractures); and hemiarthroplasty (displaced 31-B fractures) were used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative lengths of stay on trauma ward (LOS-T) on the rehabilitation unit (LOS-R) and in hospital (LOS-H) were calculated. Dates of death were recorded. Event analysis and structural equation modeling were used to assess the impact of second fractures, fracture types, age, gender, and ASA grades on these. RESULTS: : The 2 groups were comparable in gender distribution, ASA grades, fracture types, LOS, and mortality at 120 days. 2FG patients were older than 1FG (mean 83.3 vs 80.2 years) with a higher proportion being discharged to institutional care (35.5% vs 18.5%). Event modeling analysis showed that LOS-T was dependent on ASA grade, whereas mortality was dependent on ASA grade, age, and gender. Second fractures were not related to the risks of increased LOS-T, LOS-R, and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Second fractures per se do not increase the risk of longer postoperative stay or higher mortality. Any observed effect on these outcomes in second fractures represents the influence of increasing age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Katie J Sheehan; Boris Sobolev; Pierre Guy; Eric Bohm; Erik Hellsten; Jason M Sutherland; Lisa Kuramoto; Susan Jaglal Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Sameer K Khan; Mark D F Shirley; Clare Glennie; Paul V Fearon; David J Deehan Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2014-12-01 Impact factor: 4.458