4.6 Review

A Scoping Review of Strategies for the Prevention of Hip Fracture in Elderly Nursing Home Residents

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009515

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [FRN 82616]
  2. Ontario Ministry of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Elderly nursing home residents are at increased risk of hip fracture; however, the efficacy of fracture prevention strategies in this population is unclear. Objective: We performed a scoping review of randomized controlled trials of interventions tested in the long-term care (LTC) setting, examining hip fracture outcomes. Methods: We searched for citations in 6 respective electronic searches, supplemented by hand searches. Two reviewers independently reviewed all citations and full-text papers; consensus was achieved on final inclusion. Data was abstracted in duplicate. Findings: We reviewed 22,349 abstracts or citations and 949 full-text papers. Data from 20 trials were included: 7-vitamin D (n = 12,875 participants), 2-sunlight exposure (n = 522), 1-alendronate (n = 327), 1-fluoride (n = 460), 4-exercise or multimodal interventions (n = 8,165), and 5-hip protectors (n = 2,594). Vitamin D, particularly vitamin D-3 >= 800 IU orally daily, reduced hip fracture risk. Hip protectors reduced hip fractures in included studies, although a recent large study not meeting inclusion criteria was negative. Fluoride and sunlight exposure did not significantly reduce hip fractures. Falls were reduced in three studies of exercise or multimodal interventions, with one study suggesting reduced hip fractures in a secondary analysis. A staff education and risk assessment strategy did not significantly reduce falls or hip fractures. In a study underpowered for fracture outcomes, alendronate did not significantly reduce hip fractures in LTC. Conclusions: The intervention with the strongest evidence for reduction of hip fractures in LTC is Vitamin D supplementation; more research on other interventions is needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据