4.4 Article

Patient characteristics and outcomes of a hip fracture and concomitant fracture compared with hip fracture alone: results from a United Kingdom teaching hospital

Journal

ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY
Volume 136, Issue 4, Pages 463-467

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2422-z

Keywords

Hip fractures; Bone fragility; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic fractures; Fragility fractures; Concomitant fracture; Fall

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A proportion of patients sustaining hip fractures present with a concomitant fracture. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between patient characteristics and clinical outcomes, in those with a hip and concomitant fracture compared with those sustaining a hip fracture alone from a clinical service registry. Cross-sectional study using data obtained from a clinical service registry (Nottingham Hip Fracture Database) on patients aged 50 and above who suffered a hip fracture between 1/1/2003 and 31/12/2012. Data was collected on patient demographics, fracture information and healthcare outcomes. 7338 patients of which 75 % were female (mean age 82 (SD 9.4), had a hip fracture with 334 (4.6 %) patients having a concomitant fracture. The majority (58 %) were distal radius or proximal humeral fractures. Only females (p = 0.002), those taking three or fewer medications (p = 0.018) and those on long term steroids (p = 0.048) were more likely to suffer a concomitant fracture. There was no difference in mortality, rates of postoperative complication, intensive care unit or care home admission between both groups. Patients with a concomitant fracture have a 16 % longer average length of stay in hospital (mean difference 1.16; 95 % CI 1.07-1.25, p < 0.001). Patients with concomitant fractures have similar patient characteristics, except gender, polypharmacy and long term steroid use; and outcomes to those presenting with hip fracture alone, except a longer average inpatient stay.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available