Literature DB >> 8777081

Clinical outcomes and mortality after hip fracture: a 2-year follow-up study.

C Baudoin1, P Fardellone, K Bean, A Ostertag-Ezembe, F Hervy.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the burden of hip fractures, which occurred in the French region of Picardie, in 1992, among 1103 women and 356 men, whether the fractures occurred at home or in a community (i.e., patients who depended on a collective service). The data are part of the PICAROS study, which was designed to assess prospectively the outcome of patients as judged by clinical, economical, and quality of life factors. Patients and/or proxies were questioned during the 2nd or 3rd week following the fracture, and again at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after the fracture. The survey was conducted by home interview. Recruitment criteria were: 1) all patients with a hip fracture as defined by the International Classification of Disease (ICD); 2) 20 years of age and over; 3) admitted to one of the 34 surgical units from the region, public and private, and had an operation or not. Patients with metastatic or myelomatous fractures or fractures on prothesis device were not included. For the present analysis, patients under 50 years of age were excluded. Among people aged 50 years and over, 3% of the general population lived in a community; 32% of hip fractures were from a community. Patients in a community, aged 60-69, had 15 times more risk of having a hip fracture than subjects of the same age at home. The excess risk decreased with age and stabilized over 85 years of age at two to threefold. During the 24 month follow-up, 394 women and 173 men died. Among those surviving, 87% were interviewed at 2 years. We analysed seven classes of complications, according to the ICD: (1) pressure sores and blisters; (2) pulmonary infections; (3) urinary infections; (4) surgical complications; (5) orthopedic complications; (6) thrombosis and embolisms; and (7) secondary hip fractures. Patients coming from a community had a higher risk of mortality, pressure sores, surgical complications, and pulmonary and urinary infections. From an economical perspective, the institutionalized population would seem to be a profitable target for the prevention of fractures and their complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8777081     DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(95)00496-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  13 in total

1.  Clinical and panoramic predictors of femur bone mineral density.

Authors:  Stuart C White; Akira Taguchi; David Kao; Sam Wu; Susan K Service; Douglas Yoon; Yoshikazu Suei; Takashi Nakamoto; Keiji Tanimoto
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-07-27       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Direct costs of hip fractures in patients over 60 years of age in Belgium.

Authors:  J Y Reginster; P Gillet; W Ben Sedrine; G Brands; O Ethgen; C de Froidmont; C Gosset
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Which screening strategy using BMD measurements would be most cost effective for hip fracture prevention in elderly women? A decision analysis based on a Markov model.

Authors:  A M Schott; C Ganne; D Hans; G Monnier; R Gauchoux; M A Krieg; P D Delmas; P J Meunier; C Colin
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-10-13       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Risk Factors for Mortality and Readmission After Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Fracture.

Authors:  Anshuman Singh; Mark Schultzel; Guy Cafri; Edward H Yian; Mark T Dillon; Ronald A Navarro
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2019-04-23

5.  Burden of hip fracture on inpatient care: a before and after population-based study.

Authors:  A Duclos; S Couray-Targe; M Randrianasolo; S Hedoux; C M Couris; C Colin; A M Schott
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Characterisation of patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis in French primary healthcare.

Authors:  Francis Blotman; Bernard Cortet; Pascal Hilliquin; Bernard Avouac; François-André Allaert; Denis Pouchain; Anne-Françoise Gaudin; François-Emery Cotté; Abdelkader El Hasnaoui
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.923

7.  Hip fractures in the elderly: operative versus nonoperative management.

Authors:  Eileen Tay
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.858

8.  Parameters Pointing at an Increased Risk for Contralateral Hip Fractures: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Maria A Moll; Lucas M Bachmann; Alexander Joeris; Joerg Goldhahn; Michael Blauth
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2016-03

9.  Geographic differences in fractures among women.

Authors:  Anna Litwic; Mark Edwards; Cyrus Cooper; Elaine Dennison
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2012-11

Review 10.  Epidemiology and management of osteoporosis in the People's Republic of China: current perspectives.

Authors:  Xiao Lin; Dan Xiong; Yi-Qun Peng; Zhi-Feng Sheng; Xi-Yu Wu; Xian-Ping Wu; Feng Wu; Ling-Qing Yuan; Er-Yuan Liao
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 4.458

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.