The role of depression in the association between mobilisation timing and live discharge after hip fracture surgery: Secondary analysis of the UK National Hip Fracture Database.

PURPOSE: The aim was to compare the probability of discharge after hip fracture surgery conditional on being alive and in hospital between patients mobilised within and beyond 36-hours of surgery across groups defined by depression. METHODS: Data were taken from the National Hip Fracture Database and included patients 60 years of age or older who underwent hip fracture surgery in England and Wales between 2014 and 2016. The conditional probability of postsurgical live discharge was estimated for patients mobilised early and for patients mobilised late across groups with and without depression. The association between mobilisation timing and the conditional probability of live discharge were also estimated separately through adjusted generalized linear models. RESULTS: Data were analysed for 116,274 patients. A diagnosis of depression was present in 8.31% patients. In those with depression, 7,412 (76.7%) patients mobilised early. In those without depression, 84,085 (78.9%) patients mobilised early. By day 30 after surgery, the adjusted odds ratio of discharge among those who mobilised early compared to late was 1.79 (95% CI: 1.56-2.05, p<0.001) and 1.92 (95% CI: 1.84-2.00, p<0.001) for those with and without depression, respectively. CONCLUSION: A similar proportion of patients with depression mobilised early after hip fracture surgery when compared to those without a diagnosis of depression. The association between mobilisation timing and time to live discharge was observed for patients with and without depression.

The impact of the frequency, duration and type of physiotherapy on discharge after hip fracture surgery: a secondary analysis of UK national linked audit data.

Additional physiotherapy in the first postoperative week was associated with fewer days to discharge after hip fracture surgery. A 7-day physiotherapy service in the first postoperative week should be considered as a new key performance indicator in evaluating the quality of care for patients admitted with a hip fracture. INTRODUCTION: To examine the association between physiotherapy in the first week after hip fracture surgery and discharge from acute hospital. METHODS: We linked data from the UK Physiotherapy Hip Fracture Sprint Audit to hospital records for 5395 patients with hip fracture in May and June 2017. We estimated the association between the number of days patients received physiotherapy in the first postoperative week; its overall duration (< 2 h, ≥ 2 h; 30-min increment) and type (mobilisation alone, mobilisation and exercise) and the cumulative probability of discharge from acute hospital over 30 days, using proportional odds regression adjusted for confounders and the competing risk of death. RESULTS: The crude and adjusted odds ratios of discharge were 1.24 (95% CI 1.19-1.30) and 1.26 (95% CI 1.19-1.33) for an additional day of physiotherapy, 1.34 (95% CI 1.18-1.52) and 1.33 (95% CI 1.12-1.57) for ≥ 2 versus < 2 h physiotherapy, and 1.11 (95% CI 1.08-1.15) and 1.10 (95% CI 1.05-1.15) for an additional 30-min of physiotherapy. Physiotherapy type was not associated with discharge. CONCLUSION: We report an association between physiotherapy and discharge after hip fracture. An average UK hospital admitting 375 patients annually may save 456 bed-days if current provision increased so all patients with hip fracture received physiotherapy on 6-7 days in the first postoperative week. A 7-day physiotherapy service totalling at least 2 h in the first postoperative week may be considered a key performance indicator of acute care quality after hip fracture.

Prognostic factors of depression and depressive symptoms after hip fracture surgery: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hip fracture and depression are less likely to recover functional ability. This review sought to identify prognostic factors of depression or depressive symptoms up to 1 year after hip fracture surgery in adults. This review also sought to describe proposed underlying mechanisms for their association with depression or depressive symptoms. METHODS: We searched for published (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection) and unpublished (OpenGrey, Greynet, BASE, conference proceedings) studies. We did not impose any date, geographical, or language limitations. Screening (Covidence), extraction (Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies, adapted for use with prognostic factors studies Checklist), and quality appraisal (Quality in Prognosis Studies tool) were completed in duplicate. Results were summarised narratively. RESULTS: In total, 37 prognostic factors were identified from 12 studies included in this review. The quality of the underlying evidence was poor, with all studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Most factors did not have a proposed mechanism for the association. Where factors were investigated by more than one study, the evidence was often conflicting. CONCLUSION: Due to conflicting and low quality of available evidence it is not possible to make clinical recommendations based on factors prognostic of depression or depressive symptoms after hip fracture. Further high-quality research investigating prognostic factors is warranted to inform future intervention and/or stratified approaches to care after hip fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero registration: CRD42019138690 .

Inequity in rehabilitation interventions after hip fracture: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: to determine the extent to which equity factors contributed to eligibility criteria of trials of rehabilitation interventions after hip fracture. We define equity factors as those that stratify healthcare opportunities and outcomes. DESIGN: systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, PEDro, Open Grey, BASE and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials of rehabilitation interventions after hip fracture published between 1 January 2008 and 30 May 2018. Trials not published in English, secondary prevention or new models of service delivery (e.g. orthogeriatric care pathway) were excluded. Duplicate screening for eligibility, risk of bias (Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool) and data extraction (Cochrane's PROGRESS-Plus framework). RESULTS: twenty-three published, eight protocol, four registered ongoing randomised controlled trials (4,449 participants) were identified. A total of 69 equity factors contributed to eligibility criteria of the 35 trials. For more than 50% of trials, potential participants were excluded based on residency in a nursing home, cognitive impairment, mobility/functional impairment, minimum age and/or non-surgical candidacy. Where reported, this equated to the exclusion of 2,383 out of 8,736 (27.3%) potential participants based on equity factors. Residency in a nursing home and cognitive impairment were the main drivers of these exclusions. CONCLUSION: the generalisability of trial results to the underlying population of frail older adults is limited. Yet, this is the evidence base underpinning current service design. Future trials should include participants with cognitive impairment and those admitted from nursing homes. For those excluded, an evidence-informed reasoning for the exclusion should be explicitly stated. PROSPERO: CRD42018085930.

Prognostic factors of in-hospital complications after hip fracture surgery: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: To examine prognostic factors that influence complications after hip fracture surgery. To summarize proposed underlying mechanisms for their influence. METHODS: We reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Scoping Review extension. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AgeLine, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of retrieved studies for studies of prognostic factor/s of postoperative in-hospital medical complication/s among patients 50 years and older treated surgically for non-pathological closed hip fracture, published in English on January 2008-January 2018. We excluded studies of surgery type or in-hospital medications. Screening was duplicated by two independent reviewers. One reviewer completed the extraction with accuracy checks by the second reviewer. We summarized the extent, nature, and proposed underlying mechanisms for the prognostic factors of complications narratively and in a dependency graph. RESULTS: We identified 44 prognostic factors of in-hospital complications after hip fracture surgery from 56 studies. Of these, we identified 7 patient factors-dehydration, anemia, hypotension, heart rate variability, pressure risk, nutrition, and indwelling catheter use; and 7 process factors-time to surgery, anesthetic type, transfusion strategy, orthopedic versus geriatric/co-managed care, multidisciplinary care pathway, and potentially modifiable during index hospitalization. We identified underlying mechanisms for 15 of 44 factors. The reported association between 12 prognostic factors and complications was inconsistent across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Most factors were reported by one study with no proposed underlying mechanism for their influence. Where reported by more than one study, there was inconsistency in reported associations and the conceptualization of complications differed, limiting comparison across studies. It is therefore not possible to be certain whether intervening on these factors would reduce the rate of complications after hip fracture surgery.