4.5 Article

The hip fracture incidence curve is shifting to the right A forecast of the age-quake

期刊

ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA
卷 80, 期 5, 页码 520-524

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/17453670903278282

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The number of hip fractures has doubled in the last 30-40 years in many countries. Age-adjusted incidence has been reported to be decreasing in Europe and North America, but is there a decreasing trend in all age groups? Patients and methods This population-based study included all hip-fracture patients over 50 years of age (a total of 2,919 individuals, 31% of whom were men) admitted to Umea University Hospital, Sweden, from 1993 through 2005. Results The incidence of hip fracture declined between the periods 1993-1996 and 2001-2005: from 706 to 625 hip fractures per 10(5) women and from 390 to 317 hip fractures per 10(5) men. However, there was a 114% increase in the number of fractures in women aged 90 or older (12 and 25 hip fractures/year, respectively, in the two time periods). For the period 2001-05, women >= 90 years of age accounted for almost the same numbers of hip fractures as women aged 75-79 (27 fractures/year). The rate increased during this period, from 2,700 per 10(5) women to 3,900 per 1(0)5 women > 90 years. In men there were declining trends for both relative and absolute numbers. Interpretation Although age-adjusted incidence declined in the population > 50 years of age, absolute fracture rate and incidence increased in the very old. Women over 90 now have the same absolute number of hip fractures every year as women aged 75-79 years. There was a right-shift in hip fracture distribution towards the oldest old, probably due to an increased number of octo/nonagenarians, a new population of particularly frail old people that hardly existed earlier. Better health among septuagenarians may also have delayed the age at which fractures occurred. This changing pattern will strain orthopedic and geriatric resources even more.

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

4.5
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