Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Improving mobility outcomes after hip fracture is key to recovery. Possible strategies include gait training, exercise and muscle stimulation. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions aimed at improving mobility and physical functioning after hip fracture surgery in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trial registers and reference lists, to March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials assessing mobility strategies after hip fracture surgery. Eligible strategies aimed to improve mobility and included care programmes, exercise (gait, balance and functional training, resistance/strength training, endurance, flexibility, three-dimensional (3D) exercise and general physical activity) or muscle stimulation. Intervention was compared with usual care (in-hospital) or with usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit (post-hospital). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Members of the review author team independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used the assessment time point closest to four months for in-hospital studies, and the time point closest to the end of the intervention for post-hospital studies. Critical outcomes were mobility, walking speed, functioning, health-related quality of life, mortality, adverse effects and return to living at pre-fracture residence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 40 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 4059 participants from 17 countries. On average, participants were 80 years old and 80% were women. The median number of study participants was 81 and all trials had unclear or high risk of bias for one or more domains. Most trials excluded people with cognitive impairment (70%), immobility and/or medical conditions affecting mobility (72%). In-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Eighteen trials (1433 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care) in hospitals. Overall, such strategies may lead to a moderate, clinically-meaningful increase in mobility (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.96; 7 studies, 507 participants; low-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed (CI crosses zero so does not rule out a lack of effect (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.37; 6 studies, 360 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to short-term (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.30; 6 studies, 489 participants; low-certainty evidence) or long-term mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.12; 2 studies, 133 participants; low-certainty evidence), adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.11; 4 studies, 322 participants; low-certainty evidence), or return to pre-fracture residence (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.56; 2 studies, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether mobility strategies improve functioning or health-related quality of life as the certainty of evidence was very low. Gait, balance and functional training probably causes a moderate improvement in mobility (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.06; 6 studies, 463 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference in effects on mobility for resistance training. No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes. Post-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Twenty-two trials (2626 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit) in the post-hospital setting. Mobility strategies lead to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.54; 7 studies, 761 participants; high-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed compared to control (SMD 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29; 14 studies, 1067 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies lead to a small, non-clinically meaningful increase in functioning (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.36; 9 studies, 936 participants; high-certainty evidence), and probably lead to a slight increase in quality of life that may not be clinically meaningful (SMD 0.14, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.29; 10 studies, 785 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies probably make little or no difference to short-term mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.06; 8 studies, 737 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to long-term mortality (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; 4 studies, 588 participants; low-certainty evidence) or adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (95% CI includes a large reduction and large increase, RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.42; 2 studies, 206 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving gait, balance and functional exercise leads to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.36; 5 studies, 621 participants; high-certainty evidence), while training classified as being primarily resistance or strength exercise may lead to a clinically meaningful increase in mobility measured using distance walked in six minutes (mean difference (MD) 55.65, 95% CI 28.58 to 82.72; 3 studies, 198 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving multiple intervention components probably leads to a substantial, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.94, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.34; 2 studies, 104 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of aerobic training on mobility (very low-certainty evidence). No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting improvement in mobility after hip fracture may cause clinically meaningful improvement in mobility and walking speed in hospital and post-hospital settings, compared with conventional care. Interventions that include training of gait, balance and functional tasks are particularly effective. There was little or no between-group difference in the number of adverse events reported. Future trials should include long-term follow-up and economic outcomes, determine the relative impact of different types of exercise and establish effectiveness in emerging economies.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in older people, and its impact on society is substantial. After surgery, people require rehabilitation to help them recover. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation is where rehabilitation is delivered by a multidisciplinary team, supervised by a geriatrician, rehabilitation physician or other appropriate physician. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, in either inpatient or ambulatory care settings, for older people with hip fracture. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase (October 2020), and two trials registers (November 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials of post-surgical care using multidisciplinary rehabilitation of older people (aged 65 years or over) with hip fracture. The primary outcome - 'poor outcome' - was a composite of mortality and decline in residential status at long-term (generally one year) follow-up. The other 'critical' outcomes were health-related quality of life, mortality, dependency in activities of daily living, mobility, and related pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently performed study selection, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE for assessing the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: The 28 included trials involved 5351 older (mean ages ranged from 76.5 to 87 years), usually female, participants who had undergone hip fracture surgery. There was substantial clinical heterogeneity in the trial interventions and populations. Most trials had unclear or high risk of bias for one or more items, such as blinding-related performance and detection biases. We summarise the findings for three comparisons below. Inpatient rehabilitation: multidisciplinary rehabilitation versus 'usual care' Multidisciplinary rehabilitation was provided primarily in an inpatient setting in 20 trials. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation probably results in fewer cases of 'poor outcome' (death or deterioration in residential status, generally requiring institutional care) at 6 to 12 months' follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 0.98; 13 studies, 3036 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on an illustrative risk of 347 people with hip fracture with poor outcome in 1000 people followed up between 6 and 12 months, this equates to 41 (95% CI 7 to 69) fewer people with poor outcome after multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Expressed in terms of numbers needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), 25 patients (95% CI 15 to 100) would need to be treated to avoid one 'poor outcome'. Subgroup analysis by type of multidisciplinary rehabilitation intervention showed no evidence of subgroup differences. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation may result in fewer deaths in hospital but the confidence interval does not exclude a small increase in the number of deaths (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.04; 11 studies, 2455 participants; low-certainty evidence). A similar finding applies at 4 to 12 months' follow-up (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05; 18 studies, 3973 participants; low-certainty evidence). Multidisciplinary rehabilitation may result in fewer people with poorer mobility at 6 to 12 months' follow-up (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 5 studies, 1085 participants; low-certainty evidence). Due to very low-certainty evidence, we have little confidence in the findings for marginally better quality of life after multidisciplinary rehabilitation (1 study). The same applies to the mixed findings of some or no difference from multidisciplinary rehabilitation on dependence in activities of daily living at 1 to 4 months' follow-up (measured in various ways by 11 studies), or at 6 to 12 months' follow-up (13 studies). Long-term hip-related pain was not reported. Ambulatory setting: supported discharge and multidisciplinary home rehabilitation versus 'usual care' Three trials tested this comparison in 377 people mainly living at home. Due to very low-certainty evidence, we have very little confidence in the findings of little to no between-group difference in poor outcome (death or move to a higher level of care or inability to walk) at one year (3 studies); quality of life at one year (1 study); in mortality at 4 or 12 months (2 studies); in independence in personal activities of daily living (1 study); in moving permanently to a higher level of care (2 studies) or being unable to walk (2 studies). Long-term hip-related pain was not reported. One trial tested this comparison in 240 nursing home residents. There is low-certainty evidence that there may be no or minimal between-group differences at 12 months in 'poor outcome' defined as dead or unable to walk; or in mortality at 4 months or 12 months. Due to very low-certainty evidence, we have very little confidence in the findings of no between-group differences in dependency at 4 weeks or at 12 months, or in quality of life, inability to walk or pain at 12 months. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In a hospital inpatient setting, there is moderate-certainty evidence that rehabilitation after hip fracture surgery, when delivered by a multidisciplinary team and supervised by an appropriate medical specialist, results in fewer cases of 'poor outcome' (death or deterioration in residential status). There is low-certainty evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation may result in fewer deaths in hospital and at 4 to 12 months; however, it may also result in slightly more. There is low-certainty evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation may reduce the numbers of people with poorer mobility at 12 months. No conclusions can be drawn on other outcomes, for which the evidence is of very low certainty. The generally very low-certainty evidence available for supported discharge and multidisciplinary home rehabilitation means that we are very uncertain whether the findings of little or no difference for all outcomes between the intervention and usual care is true. Given the prevalent clinical emphasis on early discharge, we suggest that research is best orientated towards early supported discharge and identifying the components of multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation to optimise patient recovery within hospital and the components of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, including social care, subsequent to hospital discharge.

Exercise to Reduce Mobility Disability and Prevent Falls After Fall-Related Leg or Pelvic Fracture: RESTORE Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Disability and falls are common following fall-related lower limb and pelvic fractures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of an exercise self-management intervention on mobility-related disability and falls after lower limb or pelvic fracture. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred thirty-six community dwellers aged 60+ years within 2 years of lower limb or pelvic fracture recruited from hospitals and community advertising. INTERVENTIONS: RESTORE (Recovery Exercises and STepping On afteR fracturE) intervention (individualized, physiotherapist-prescribed home program of weight-bearing balance and strength exercises, fall prevention advice) versus usual care. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes were mobility-related disability and rate of falls. KEY RESULTS: Primary outcomes were available for 80% of randomized participants. There were no significant between-group differences in mobility-related disability at 12 months measured by (a) Short Physical Performance Battery (continuous version, baseline-adjusted between-group difference 0.08, 95% CI - 0.01 to 0.17, p = 0.08, n = 273); (b) Activity Measure Post Acute Care score (0.18, 95% CI - 2.89 to 3.26, p = 0.91, n = 270); (c) Late Life Disability Instrument (1.37, 95% CI - 2.56 to 5.32, p = 0.49, n = 273); or in rate of falls over the 12-month study period (incidence rate ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.34, n = 336, p = 0.83). Between-group differences favoring the intervention group were evident in some secondary outcomes: balance and mobility, fall risk (Physiological Profile Assessment tool), physical activity, mood, health and community outings, but these should be interpreted with caution due to risk of chance findings from multiple analyses. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant intervention impacts on mobility-related disability and falls were detected, but benefits were seen for secondary measures of balance and mobility, fall risk, physical activity, mood, health, and community outings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000805077.

Nutritional supplementation for hip fracture aftercare in older people.

BACKGROUND: Older people with hip fractures are often malnourished at the time of fracture, and subsequently have poor food intake. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2000, and previously updated in 2010. OBJECTIVES: To review the effects (benefits and harms) of nutritional interventions in older people recovering from hip fracture. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, trial registers and reference lists. The search was last run in November 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of nutritional interventions for people aged over 65 years with hip fracture where the interventions were started within the first month after hip fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we pooled data for primary outcomes which were: all cause mortality; morbidity; postoperative complications (e.g. wound infections, pressure sores, deep venous thromboses, respiratory and urinary infections, cardiovascular events); and 'unfavourable outcome' defined as the number of trial participants who died plus the number of survivors with complications. We also pooled data for adverse events such as diarrhoea. MAIN RESULTS: We included 41 trials involving 3881 participants. Outcome data were limited and risk of bias assessment showed that trials were often methodologically flawed, with less than half of trials at low risk of bias for allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data, or selective reporting of outcomes. The available evidence was judged of either low or very low quality indicating that we were uncertain or very uncertain about the estimates.Eighteen trials evaluated oral multinutrient feeds that provided non-protein energy, protein, vitamins and minerals. There was low-quality evidence that oral feeds had little effect on mortality (24/486 versus 31/481; risk ratio (RR) 0.81 favouring supplementation, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.32; 15 trials). Thirteen trials evaluated the effect of oral multinutrient feeds on complications (e.g. pressure sore, infection, venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, confusion). There was low-quality evidence that the number of participants with complications may be reduced with oral multinutrient feeds (123/370 versus 157/367; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.86; 11 trials). Based on very low-quality evidence from six studies (334 participants), oral supplements may result in lower numbers with 'unfavourable outcome' (death or complications): RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.89. There was very low-quality evidence for six studies (442 participants) that oral supplementation did not result in an increased incidence of vomiting and diarrhoea (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.05).Only very low-quality evidence was available from the four trials examining nasogastric multinutrient feeding. Pooled data from three heterogeneous trials showed no evidence of an effect of supplementation on mortality (14/142 versus 14/138; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.97). One trial (18 participants) found no difference in complications. None reported on unfavourable outcome. Nasogastric feeding was poorly tolerated. One study reported no cases of aspiration pneumonia.There is very low-quality evidence from one trial (57 participants, mainly men) of no evidence for an effect of tube feeding followed by oral supplementation on mortality or complications. Tube feeding, however, was poorly tolerated.There is very low-quality evidence from one trial (80 participants) that a combination of intravenous feeding and oral supplements may not affect mortality but could reduce complications. However, this expensive intervention is usually reserved for people with non-functioning gastrointestinal tracts, which is unlikely in this trial.Four trials tested increasing protein intake in an oral feed. These provided low-quality evidence for no clear effect of increased protein intake on mortality (30/181 versus 21/180; RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.37; 4 trials) or number of participants with complications but very low-quality and contradictory evidence of a reduction in unfavourable outcomes (66/113 versus 82/110; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.95; 2 trials). There was no evidence of an effect on adverse events such as diarrhoea.Trials testing intravenous vitamin B1 and other water soluble vitamins, oral 1-alpha-hydroxycholecalciferol (vitamin D), high dose bolus vitamin D, different oral doses or sources of vitamin D, intravenous or oral iron, ornithine alpha-ketoglutarate versus an isonitrogenous peptide supplement, taurine versus placebo, and a supplement with vitamins, minerals and amino acids, provided low- or very low-quality evidence of no clear effect on mortality or complications, where reported.Based on low-quality evidence, one trial evaluating the use of dietetic assistants to help with feeding indicated that this intervention may reduce mortality (19/145 versus 36/157; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.95) but not the number of participants with complications (79/130 versus 84/125). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is low-quality evidence that oral multinutrient supplements started before or soon after surgery may prevent complications within the first 12 months after hip fracture, but that they have no clear effect on mortality. There is very low-quality evidence that oral supplements may reduce 'unfavourable outcome' (death or complications) and that they do not result in an increased incidence of vomiting and diarrhoea. Adequately sized randomised trials with robust methodology are required. In particular, the role of dietetic assistants, and peripheral venous feeding or nasogastric feeding in very malnourished people require further evaluation.

Exercise and fall prevention self-management to reduce mobility-related disability and falls after fall-related lower limb fracture in older people: protocol for the RESTORE (Recovery Exercises and STepping On afteR fracturE) randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Lasting disability and further falls are common and costly problems in older people following fall-related lower limb and pelvic fractures. Exercise interventions can improve mobility after fracture and reduce falls in older people, however the optimal approach to rehabilitation after fall-related lower limb and pelvic fracture is unclear. This randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the effects of an exercise and fall prevention self-management intervention on mobility-related disability and falls in older people following fall-related lower limb or pelvic fracture. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention will also be investigated. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding for physical performance tests and intention-to-treat analysis will be conducted. Three hundred and fifty people aged 60 years and over with a fall-related lower limb or pelvic fracture, who are living at home or in a low care residential aged care facility and have completed active rehabilitation, will be recruited. Participants will be randomised to receive a 12-month intervention or usual care. The intervention group will receive ten home visits from a physiotherapist to prescribe an individualised exercise program with motivational interviewing, plus fall prevention education through individualised advice from the physiotherapist or attendance at the group based "Stepping On" program (seven two-hour group sessions). Participants will be followed for a 12-month period. Primary outcome measures will be mobility-related disability and falls. Secondary outcomes will include measures of balance and mobility, falls risk, physical activity, walking aid use, frailty, pain, nutrition, falls efficacy, mood, positive and negative affect, quality of life, assistance required, hospital readmission, and health-system and community-service contact. DISCUSSION: This study will determine the effect and cost-effectiveness of this exercise self management intervention on mobility-related disability and falls in older people who have recently sustained a fall-related lower limb or pelvic fracture. The results will have implications for the design and implementation of interventions for older people with fall related lower limb fractures. The findings of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and through professional and scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000805077.

An initial loading-dose vitamin D versus placebo after hip fracture surgery: randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Improving vitamin D (25-OHD) status may be an important modifiable factor that could reduce disability severity, fall-rates and mortality associated after hip fracture surgery. Providing a loading-dose post-surgery may overcome limitations in adherence to daily supplementation. METHOD: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 218 adults, aged 65-years or older, requiring hip fracture surgery were assigned to receive a single loading-dose of cholecalciferol (250,000 IU vitamin-D3, the REVITAHIP - Replenishment of Vitamin D in Hip Fracture strategy) or placebo, both receiving daily vitamin-D(800 IU) and calcium (500 mg) for 26-weeks. Outcome measures were 2.4 m gait-velocity, falls, fractures, death (Week-4), 25-OHD levels, quality-of-life measure (EuroQoL) and mortality at weeks-2, 4 and 26. RESULTS: Mean age of 218 participants was 83.9(7.2) years and 77.1 % were women. Baseline mean 25-OHD was 52.7(23.5)nmol/L, with higher levels at Week-2 (73 vs 66 nmol/L; p = .019) and Week-4 (83 vs 75 nmol/L; p = .030) in the Active-group, but not at Week-26. At week-4, there were no differences in 2.4 m gait-velocity (0.42 m/s vs 0.39 m/s, p = .490), fractures (2.7 % vs 2.8 %, p = .964) but Active participants reported less falls (6.3 % vs 21.1 %, χ(2) = 4.327; p = 0.024), with no significant reduction in deaths at week-4 (1 vs 3, p = 0.295), higher percentage reporting 'no pain or discomfort' (96.4 % vs 88.8 %, p = 0.037), and trended for higher EuroQoL-scores (p = 0.092) at week-26. One case of hypercalcemia at week-2 normalised by week-4. CONCLUSION: Among older people after hip fracture surgery, the REVITAHIP strategy is a safe and low cost method of improving vitamin-D levels, reducing falls and pain levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN ACTRN12610000392066 (Date of registration: 14/05/2010).

Vitamin D and vitamin D analogues for preventing fractures in post-menopausal women and older men.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D and related compounds have been used to prevent osteoporotic fractures in older people. This is the third update of a Cochrane review first published in 1996. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of vitamin D or related compounds, with or without calcium, for preventing fractures in post-menopausal women and older men. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (to December 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to November Week 3 2012), EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 50), CINAHL (1982 to December 2012), BIOSIS (1985 to 3 January 2013), Current Controlled Trials (December 2012) and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that compared vitamin D or related compounds, alone or with calcium, against placebo, no intervention or calcium alone, and that reported fracture outcomes in older people. The primary outcome was hip fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial risk of selection bias and aspects of methodological quality, and extracted data. Data were pooled, where possible, using the fixed-effect model, or the random-effects model when heterogeneity between studies appeared substantial. MAIN RESULTS: We included 53 trials with a total of 91,791 participants. Thirty-one trials, with sample sizes ranging from 70 to 36,282 participants, examined vitamin D (including 25-hydroxy vitamin D) with or without calcium in the prevention of fractures in community, nursing home or hospital inpatient populations. Twelve of these 31 trials had participants with a mean or median age of 80 years or over.Another group of 22 smaller trials examined calcitriol or alfacalcidol (1-alphahydroxyvitamin D3), mostly with participants who had established osteoporosis. These trials were carried out in the setting of institutional referral clinics or hospitals.In the assessment of risk of bias for random sequence generation, 21 trials (40%) were deemed to be at low risk, 28 trials (53%) at unclear risk and four trials at high risk (8%). For allocation concealment, 22 trials were at low risk (42%), 29 trials were at unclear risk (55%) and two trials were at high risk (4%).There is high quality evidence that vitamin D alone, in the formats and doses tested, is unlikely to be effective in preventing hip fracture (11 trials, 27,693 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.98 to 1.29) or any new fracture (15 trials, 28,271 participants; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.11).There is high quality evidence that vitamin D plus calcium results in a small reduction in hip fracture risk (nine trials, 49,853 participants; RR 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.96; P value 0.01). In low-risk populations (residents in the community: with an estimated eight hip fractures per 1000 per year), this equates to one fewer hip fracture per 1000 older adults per year (95% CI 0 to 2). In high risk populations (residents in institutions: with an estimated 54 hip fractures per 1000 per year), this equates to nine fewer hip fractures per 1000 older adults per year (95% CI 2 to 14). There is high quality evidence that vitamin D plus calcium is associated with a statistically significant reduction in incidence of new non-vertebral fractures. However, there is only moderate quality evidence of an absence of a statistically significant preventive effect on clinical vertebral fractures. There is high quality evidence that vitamin D plus calcium reduces the risk of any type of fracture (10 trials, 49,976 participants; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.99).In terms of the results for adverse effects: mortality was not adversely affected by either vitamin D or vitamin D plus calcium supplementation (29 trials, 71,032 participants, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.01). Hypercalcaemia, which was usually mild (2.6 to 2.8 mmol/L), was more common in people receiving vitamin D or an analogue, with or without calcium (21 trials, 17,124 participants, RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.57 to 3.31), especially for calcitriol (four trials, 988 participants, RR 4.41, 95% CI 2.14 to 9.09), than in people receiving placebo or control. There was also a small increased risk of gastrointestinal symptoms (15 trials, 47,761 participants, RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08), especially for calcium plus vitamin D (four trials, 40,524 participants, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09), and a significant increase in renal disease (11 trials, 46,548 participants, RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.33). Other systematic reviews have found an increased association of myocardial infarction with supplemental calcium; and evidence of increased myocardial infarction and stroke, but decreased cancer, with supplemental calcium plus vitamin D, without an overall effect on mortality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D alone is unlikely to prevent fractures in the doses and formulations tested so far in older people. Supplements of vitamin D and calcium may prevent hip or any type of fracture. There was a small but significant increase in gastrointestinal symptoms and renal disease associated with vitamin D and calcium. This review found that there was no increased risk of death from taking calcium and vitamin D.

An initial loading-dose vitamin D versus placebo after hip fracture surgery: baseline characteristics of a randomized controlled trial (REVITAHIP).

BACKGROUND: Hypovitaminosis D is particularly common among older people with a proximal femoral (hip) fracture. There are currently no agreed strategies for vitamin D replenishment after hip fracture surgery. The REVITAHIP Study is a multisite, double-blinded randomized-controlled trial investigating the effects of an oral vitamin D loading dose on gait velocity after hip fracture surgery. We describe the baseline characteristics of participants, aiming to document hypovitaminosis D and its associations after hip fracture. METHODS: Participants, over 65, recruited within 7 days following hip fracture surgery from 3 Australia hospitals, were randomly allocated to receive a loading dose of vitamin D3 (250,000IU) or placebo, followed by oral maintenance vitamin D3/calcium (800 IU/500 mg) and the usual hip fracture rehabilitation pathway. Demographic and clinical data were collected, including surgical procedure, pre-fracture functional status, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) for pain, grip strength and gait velocity. The associations of baseline 25-OHD levels with demographic and clinical data were assessed using Pearson's correlation, ANOVA and regression analyses. RESULTS: Two-hundred-and-eighteen people with hip fracture participated in the study. Mean age was 83.9+/-7.2 years, 77% were women and 82% lived in private homes. Fifty-six percent had a subcapital fracture. Mean comorbidity count was 3.13+/-2.0. Mean MMSE was 26.1+/-3.9. Forty-seven percent of participants had hypovitaminosis D (<50 nmol/L). Multivariate regression models demonstrated higher baseline vitamin D levels were significantly associated with higher premorbid Barthel index scores, lower post-operative VRS pain levels and use of vitamin D. CONCLUSION: This study cohort shared similar demographic characteristics and comorbidities with other cohorts of people with hip fracture, with the probable exception of less cognitive impairment. Hypovitaminosis D was not as prevalent as previously documented. Patients taking vitamin D supplements and with higher premorbid Barthel index, reflecting greater independence and activity, tended to have higher 25-OHD levels at baseline. Further, lower VRS pain ratings following surgery were associated with higher vitamin D levels. Such associations will need further investigation to determine causation. (ANZCTR number, ACTRN12610000392066). TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTRN ACTRN12610000392066.

Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture mainly occurs in older people. Strategies to improve mobility include gait retraining, various forms of exercise and muscle stimulation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of different interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and other databases, and reference lists of articles, up to April 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing different mobilisation strategies after hip fracture surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. There was no data pooling. MAIN RESULTS: The 19 included trials (involving 1589 older adults) were small, often with methodological flaws. Just two pairs of trials tested similar interventions.Twelve trials evaluated mobilisation strategies started soon after hip fracture surgery. Single trials found improved mobility from, respectively, a two-week weight-bearing programme, a quadriceps muscle strengthening exercise programme and electrical stimulation aimed at alleviating pain. Single trials found no significant improvement in mobility from, respectively, a treadmill gait retraining programme, 12 weeks of resistance training, and 16 weeks of weight-bearing exercise. One trial testing ambulation started within 48 hours of surgery found contradictory results. One historic trial found no significant difference in unfavourable outcomes for weight bearing started at two versus 12 weeks. Of two trials evaluating more intensive physiotherapy regimens, one found no difference in recovery, the other reported a higher level of drop-out in the more intensive group. Two trials tested electrical stimulation of the quadriceps: one found no benefit and poor tolerance of the intervention; the other found improved mobility and good tolerance.Seven trials evaluated strategies started after hospital discharge. Started soon after discharge, two trials found improved outcome after 12 weeks of intensive physical training and a home-based physical therapy programme respectively. Begun after completion of standard physical therapy, one trial found improved outcome after six months of intensive physical training, one trial found increased activity levels from a one year exercise programme, and one trial found no significant effects of home-based resistance or aerobic training. One trial found improved outcome after home-based exercises started around 22 weeks from injury. One trial found home-based weight-bearing exercises starting at seven months produced no significant improvement in mobility. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to establish the best strategies for enhancing mobility after hip fracture surgery.

Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in older people and its impact on society is substantial. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, in either inpatient or ambulatory care settings, for older patients with hip fracture. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (April 2009), The Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE and EMBASE (both to April 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of post-surgical care using multidisciplinary rehabilitation of older patients (aged 65 years or over) with hip fracture. The primary outcome, 'poor outcome' was a composite of mortality and decline in residential status at long-term (generally one year) follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial selection was by consensus. Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data were pooled where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: The 13 included trials involved 2498 older, usually female, patients who had undergone hip fracture surgery. Though generally well conducted, some trials were at risk of bias such as from imbalances in key baseline characteristics.There was substantial clinical heterogeneity in the trial interventions and populations. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation was provided primarily in an inpatient setting in 11 trials. Pooled results showed no statistically significant difference between intervention and control groups for poor outcome (risk ratio 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.01), mortality (risk ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.07) or hospital readmission. Individual trials found better results, often short-term only, in the intervention group for activities of daily living and mobility. There was considerable heterogeneity in length of stay and cost data. Three trials reporting carer burden showed no evidence of detrimental effect from the intervention. Overall, the evidence indicates that multidisciplinary rehabilitation is not harmful.The trial comparing primarily home-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation with usual inpatient care found marginally improved function and a clinically significantly lower burden for carers in the intervention group. Participants of this group had shorter hospital stays, but longer periods of rehabilitation. One trial found no significant effect from doubling the number of weekly contacts at the patient's home from a multidisciplinary rehabilitation team. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: While there was a tendency to a better overall result in patients receiving multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation, these results were not statistically significant.Future trials of multidisciplinary rehabilitation should aim to establish both effectiveness and cost effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation overall, rather than evaluate its components.

Treatment of Osteoporosis in Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities: Update on Consensus Recommendations for Fracture Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Older people living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) are at a higher risk of suffering fractures than the community-dwelling older population. The first Consensus Conference on Treatment of Osteoporosis in RACFs in Australia, held in Sydney in July 2009, aimed to address some of the issues relating to the treatment of older residents with osteoporosis in RACFs. Considering that the field of osteoporosis diagnosis and management has significantly advanced in the last 5 years and that new evidence has been generated from studies performed within RACFs, a Second Consensus Conference was held in Sydney in November 2014. METHODS: An expert panel met in November 2014 in Penrith, NSW, Australia in an attempt to reach a consensus on diverse issues related to the treatment of osteoporosis at RACFs. Participants were selected by the scientific committee on the basis of their practice in an RACF and/or major published articles. The co-chairs distributed topics randomly to all participants, who then had to propose a statement on each topic for approval by the conference after a short, evidence-based presentation, when possible. RESULTS: This article provides an update on the most relevant evidence on osteoporosis in older people living in RACFs graded according to its level, quality, and relevance. CONCLUSION: As with the first consensus, it is hoped that this statement will constitute an important guide to aid physicians in their decision making while practicing at RACFs.

Complementary and alternative medicine in diabetes (CALMIND)--a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to further elucidate the demographic and diabetes characteristics of diabetic patients in Australia who use complementary and alternative medicines (CAM). METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of 149 patients with diabetes attending a general endocrine clinic in a tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients (25%) stated they had used CAM therapies within the past 5 years. Vitamins (53%) were the most common CAM therapy used. A greater number of CAM nonusers reported calf pain whilst walking (21% vs. 9%, p=0.051), and HbA1c values were lower for CAM nonusers (7.7% vs. 8.1%, p=0.057). Amongst CAM users, a majority of patients (85%) did not consult with their specialist or general practitioner prior to starting CAM therapy. CONCLUSIONS: With the increasing burden of diabetes, health practitioners will need to be more vigilant and understanding of the potential impact of CAM use on diabetes management.

Contemporary Pain Management in Elderly Patients After Hip Fracture Surgery: Cross-sectional Analyses at Baseline of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate pain management following hip fracture surgery reduces length of stay, reduces incidence of delirium, promotes recovery, and improves mobility. Previous research suggests that hip fracture pain is undertreated in some patient subgroups, and that hypovitaminosis D can further aggravate pain which could hinder active rehabilitation. We provide a cross-sectional analysis of the baseline characteristics of participants in the REVITAHIP study with the aim of documenting pain intensity and its associations after hip fracture and to explore the characteristics of people who report higher levels of pain. METHOD: We analyzed the baseline characteristics with a focus on pain scores in patients admitted with a hip fracture (undergoing surgery) to 3 teaching hospitals over New South Wales, Australia, between January 2011 and April 2013. Patients were evaluated using the Verbal Rating Scale (VRS). Secondary measures including 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels at baseline, hip fracture subtype, type of surgical intervention, quality of life score, and cognitive and mobility status were correlated with the VRS using the Pearson correlation, ANOVA, and regression analysis. RESULTS: The 218 participants had a mean age of 83.9±7.2 years and 77.1% were women of whom 16.0% had a Mini Mental State Examination score of ≤23 of 30. The mean and SD VRS pain score was 3.5±2.3. More than half (61.9%, n=113) had VRS≥3 and 18.1% (n=52) had VRS≥5. Using the EuroQOL pain subscore, 78.1% had moderate pain or discomfort and 7.9% had extreme pain or discomfort. Using a multivariate regression model, postoperative VRS was significantly higher in persons with a higher comorbidity count, those previously living independently alone, and surgical fixative modality with hemiarthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the levels of pain reported by this cohort are acceptable although approximately 10% to 15% had higher than reasonable levels of pain. This study provides an insight into pain assessment and management by identifying certain patient subtypes who are vulnerable to undertreatment of pain.

Evidence-based review for patients undergoing elective hip and knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the evidence for different interventions in the preoperative, perioperative and post-operative care for people undergoing elective total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement surgery. METHOD: A multidisciplinary working group comprising consumers, managers and clinicians from the areas of orthopaedics, rheumatology, aged care and rehabilitation evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews/meta-analyses concerning aspects of preoperative, perioperative and post-operative clinical care periods for THR/TKR through systematic searching of Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from May 2007 to April 2011. Multiple reviewers determined study eligibility and one or more members extracted primary study findings. The body of evidence were assessed and specific recommendations made according to NHMRC guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-five aspects were identified for review. Recommendations for 16 of 25 areas of care were made: impact of waiting, multidisciplinary preparation, preoperative exercise, smoking cessation, interventions for comorbid conditions, predictors of outcome, clinical pathways, implementation of a blood management programme, antibiotic prophylaxis, regional anaesthesia and analgesia, use of a tourniquet in knee replacement, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, early post-operative cryotherapy, early mobilization and continuous passive motion. In the post-operative period, study heterogeneity across all aspects of care precluded specific recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: There was a deficiency in the quality of the evidence supporting key aspects of the continuum of care for primary THR/TKR surgery. Consequently, recommendations were limited. Prioritization and funding for research into areas likely to impact clinical practice and patient outcomes after elective joint replacement surgery are the next important steps.

Improving mobility and reducing disability in older people through early high-dose vitamin d replacement following hip fracture: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation.

Hypovitaminosis D is particularly common among older people with a proximal femoral (hip) fracture and has been linked with poorer lower extremity functioning, falls, and fractures. There is evidence that disability severity and fall rates may be reduced by adequate vitamin D replacement. However, the ideal regimen for vitamin D administration to have these benefits in older people who have been in the hospital has not been established. This randomized controlled trial will investigate the effects of an oral vitamin D loading dose with maintenance oral vitamin D and calcium on lower extremity function (gait velocity), correction of hypovitaminosis D, falls, and fractures among older people after hip fracture surgery. The cost-effectiveness of the REVITAHIP program from the health and community service provider's perspective will also be established, as will predictors of adherence with the treatment. A total of 450 older people who have recently had a hip fracture requiring surgical intervention will be screened to achieve 250 participants for the study. Participants will have no medical contraindications to vitamin D replacement. The primary outcome measure will be mobility-related disability as measured with the 2.4-m gait velocity test. Secondary measures will be 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) levels at 2, 4, and 26 weeks, number of falls and fractures, and additional measures of mobility, disability, quality of life, health system and community-service contact, adherence to the intervention, and adverse events. After surgical fixation and being deemed medically stable, participants will be randomly allocated to an intervention or placebo-control group. Participants of the intervention group will receive initial oral 250 000 IU (5 × 50 000 IU) vitamin D3 tablets. Both groups will receive oral maintenance vitamin D3 and calcium and will follow the usual hip fracture rehabilitation pathway. The study will determine the impact of a vitamin D loading dose on mobility-related disability in older people following hip fracture and will discuss the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a loading dose vitamin D replacement more generally. The results will have direct implications for future use of vitamin D therapy for this high-risk group.

A prospective review of hip fracture subtypes, surgical procedure, cognitive status, and analgesia use across 4 Australian hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: To correlate analgesia use among patients with hip fracture requiring surgery with hip fracture subtype, cognitive status, and type of surgery in the postacute period. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective review of patients with hip fractures requiring surgical intervention. A total of 415 patients (mean age: 81.2 ± 9.1 years, 74.3% women) presented with 195 subcapital fractures (39 undisplaced, 156 displaced) and 220 trochanteric fractures (136 stable, 84 unstable) requiring surgery. SETTING: Inpatient orthopedic units in 4 Australian hospitals. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measures were mean analgesia usage (oral morphine equivalent) for 4 defined time intervals and total amount 36 hours following surgery. RESULTS: Patients with subtrochanteric fractures required more analgesia compared with displaced-subcapital, undisplaced-subcapital, basicervical, stable-pertrochanteric, and unstable-pertrochanteric fractures in the 24 to 36 hours following operation (24.7 vs 11.3 vs 8.8 vs 12.1 vs 7.6 vs 9.7, P = .001). Total analgesia requirements were higher in patients treated with an intramedullary nail, increasing by 1.3- to 3.3-fold in the 36 hours postsurgery. Patients with cognitive impairment utilized markedly less analgesia at all time periods measured. At 24 to 36 hours, higher levels of analgesia were noted in patients with higher premorbid level of mobility (P = .015) and activities of daily living function (P = .007). CONCLUSION: Important differences in utilization of analgesia following hip fracture across readily defined clinical groups exist. Proactive pain management for those with cognitive impairment, certain hip fracture subtypes, and surgical procedures may enable early functional mobility and other activities.

Complementary and alternative medicine use by osteoporotic patients in Australia (CAMEO-A): a prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies have become increasingly popular and are used regularly by patients with osteoporosis in Australasia and worldwide. This study was done to determine the prevalence and patterns of use of CAM in an Australian osteoporosis clinic. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of 202 patients attending an academic osteoporosis clinic in Sydney, Australia. RESULTS: Subject had a mean age of 68.5 +/- 10.9 years, 79.7% were female, and 55.9% were born overseas. CAM use was reported by 104 patients (51.5%) using the standard and 62 patients (30.7%) using the stringent definition of CAM. The most frequent CAM were multivitamins (24.0%), acupuncture (19.2%), t'ai chi (14.4%), and yoga (12.5%). Seventy-three percent (73%) did not consult a physician before starting CAM and 23.1% stated that their treating specialists were unaware of CAM use. The most common reasons for using CAM were having a holistic approach (53.0%) and inadequate pain control (29.0%). CAM users were associated with Asian country of birth (23.1% versus 12.2%, p = 0.03), more frequent clinic visits over a 12-month period (1.8 versus 1.5 times, p = 0.03), and a trend for a worse lumbar spine T-score (-2.35 versus -2.20 SD, p = 0.05) and higher rates of university education (26.0% versus 14.3%, p = 0.05). It is estimated that $696 million is spent annually on CAM by patients with osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients attending osteoporosis clinics frequently use CAM. Physicians may need to routinely inquire about a history of CAM use to ensure better screening for possible adverse clinical interactions.