| Literature DB >> 31001454 |
Timothy Kenyon-Smith1, Eric Nguyen1, Tarandeep Oberai1, Ruurd Jarsma1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early mobilization after hip fracture surgery is a widely practiced component of postoperative care. However, there is little evidence to suggest that early mobilization post-hip fracture surgery is beneficial in reducing postoperative complications. This study aims to investigate the effect of early mobilization following hip fracture surgery on postoperative complications.Entities:
Keywords: delirium; geriatric medicine; geriatric trauma; physical medicine and rehabilitation; physical therapy; trauma surgery
Year: 2019 PMID: 31001454 PMCID: PMC6454638 DOI: 10.1177/2151459319826431
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil ISSN: 2151-4585
Figure 1.Flow chart of patient exclusions.
Figure 2.Distribution of postoperative complications.
Figure 3.Fraction of postoperative mobility outcomes.
Figure 4.Cumulative frequency of mobilization time.
Figure 5.Time bedbound versus complications.
Figure 6.Odds ratios of mobilizing and developing a complication compared to remaining bedbound and developing a complication.
Patient Demographics.
| Characteristic | Bedbound | Delayed Mobilization (>24 hours) | Early Mobilization (<24 hours) | Total |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients (%) | 48 (20%) | 95 (40%) | 97 (40%) | 240 | |
| Sex, % (N) | |||||
| Male | 33% (16) | 32% (30) | 30% (29) | 31% (75) | .913a |
| Female | 67% (32) | 68% (65) | 70% (68) | 69% (165) | |
| Mean age (years) | 86 | 84 | 78 | 82 | .0001b |
| Mean comorbidities | 2.44 | 1.31 | 0.86 | 1.36 | .0001b |
| Premorbid mobility status, % (N) | |||||
| Bedbound | 21% (10) | 0% (0) | 1% (1) | 4.6% (11) | .0001a |
| Standing with frame | 4% (2) | 0% (0) | 0% (0) | 1% (2) | |
| Walking with frame assisted | 17% (8) | 11% (11) | 8% (8) | 11% (27) | |
| Walking with frame unassisted | 31% (15) | 37% (36) | 22% (21) | 31% (72) | |
| Walking with stick | 6% (3) | 16% (15) | 15% (14) | 13% (32) | |
| Walking unassisted | 21% (10) | 36% (35) | 54% (51) | 40% (96) | |
Abbreviation: ANOVA, analysis of variance.
a Analyzed using χ2 test.
b Analyzed using 1-way ANOVA.
Subgroup Comparison of Complication Rates Between Patients Who Remained Bedbound and Mobilized.
| Premorbid Health | N | Bedbound | Ambulatory | Odds Ratio (95% CI)a |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Complication Rate | N | Complication Rate | ||||
| Good | 43 | 2 | 0.50 | 41 | 0.27 | 0.367 (0.021-6.381) | .476 |
| Moderate | 46 | 8 | 0.25 | 38 | 0.29 | 1.222 (0.213-7.013) | .822 |
| Poor | 41 | 12 | 0.42 | 29 | 0.59 | 1.983 (0.507-7.766) | .322 |
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
a Odds ratio of developing a complication comparing mobilization to remaining bed bound.
b Analyzed using χ2 test.
Subgroup Comparison of Time to Mobilization of Patients Who Mobilized in Terms of Complications..
| Premorbid Health | N | No Complication | Complication |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Median Time to Mobilization (hours) | Minimum Time to Mobilization (hours) | Maximum Time to Mobilization (hours) | N | Median Time to Mobilization (hours) | Minimum Time to Mobilization (hours) | Maximum Time to Mobilization (hours) | |||
| Good | 41 | 30 | 23 | 13 | 51 | 11 | 23 | 15 | 72 | .275 |
| Moderate | 38 | 26 | 24 | 19 | 123 | 12 | 26 | 17 | 101 | .504 |
| Poor | 29 | 12 | 24 | 16 | 71 | 17 | 49 | 21 | 101 | .044 |
a Analyzed using χ2 test.