4.2 Article

Walking Recovery after a Hip Fracture: A Prospective Follow-Up Study among Community-Dwelling over 60-Year Old Men and Women

Journal

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
Volume 2014, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2014/289549

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Kela (Social Insurance Institution of Finland)
  2. Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture
  3. Miina Sillanpaa Foundation
  4. Finnish Cultural Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. Recovery of walking outdoors after hip fracture is important for equal participation in the community. The causes of poor recovery are not fully understood. This study investigates recovery of walking outdoors and associated determinants after hip fracture. Methods. A prospective follow-up study, among clinical sample of 81 community-dwelling hip fracture patients over 60 years. Perceived difficulty in walking outdoors and 500 meters was assessed before fracture, at discharge to home (3.2 +/- 2.2 weeks after surgery), and on average 6.0 +/- 3.3 weeks after discharge. Potential determinants for walking recovery were assessed. Linear latent trajectory model was used to analyse changes during follow-up. Association between walking trajectories and potential determinants was analysed with a logistic regression model. Results. Two trajectories, No-to-minor-difficulty and Catastrophic, were found. Thirty-eight percent of the participants ended up in the Catastrophic trajectory for walking outdoors and 67% for 500 meters. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that use of walking aid and indoor falls before fracture and prolonged pain were independently associated with catastrophic decline in both primary outcomes: difficulty in walking outdoors and 500 meters. Conclusions. A large proportion of community-dwelling older people recovering from hip fracture experienced catastrophic decline in outdoor walking. Acknowledging recovery prognoses at early stage enables individualized rehabilitation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available