Home Versus Hospital Rehabilitation of Older Adults Following Hip Fracture Yields Similar Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

The increase in hip fractures (HF) due to aging of the population and the rise in attractiveness of services provided at home following the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasize the need to compare outcomes of home versus hospital HF rehabilitation. To date, studies comparing the 2 services have focused primarily on clinical outcomes rather than patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This longitudinal observational study evaluated PROs of older adults with HF in the 2 settings. The SF36 questionnaire was used to measure PROs 3 times after surgery. The first PRO was retrospective and reflected pre-fracture health status. Descriptive statistics and mixed-effect logistic regression were used. Of 86 patients participating in the study, 41 had home rehabilitation and 45 had hospital rehabilitation. In both groups, the mental and physical scores plummeted 2 weeks after the HF, compared to pre-fracture status. The difference in improvement from pre-fracture status to recovery in both groups, were not significantly (P < .05) different, except for the pain domain. PROs of home versus hospital rehabilitation were similar, suggesting that rehabilitation at home can be as effective as hospital rehabilitation for suitable patients. This knowledge can improve quality of care in an aging global population.

Perception of Goals and Expected Outcomes in Older Hip Fracture Patients and Their Medical Staff: A Cross Sectional Study.

Background: Goal-oriented patientcare is a key element in qualityhealthcare. Medical-caregiver's (MC) are expected to generate a shared decision-making process with patients regarding goals and expected health-outcomes. Hip-fracture patients (HFP) are usually older-adults with multiple health-conditions, necessitating that agreed-upon goals regarding the rehabilitation process, take these conditions into consideration. This topic has yet to be investigated by pairing and comparing the perception of expected outcomes and therapeutic goals of multidisciplinary MCs and their HF patient's. Our aim was to assess in a quantitative method whether HFPs and their multidisciplinary MCs agree upon target health-outcomes and their most important goals as they are reflected in the SF12 questionnaire. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, multi-center, study of HFPs and their MCs. Patients and MCs were asked to rate their top three most important goals for rehabilitation from the SF12 eight subscales: physical functioning, physical role limitation, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, emotional role limitation and mental health, and indicate their expected outcome. Descriptive statistics and mixed effect logistic-regression were used to compare concordance of the ratings. Agreement between patients and MCs was assessed using interclass coefficients (ICCs). Results: A total of 378 ratings were collected from 52 patients, 12 nurses, 12 physicians and 6 paramedical personnel. Each patient had between 3 and 9 raters. Patients considered physical functioning and physical role limitation more important than did MCs. Physicians and nurses emphasized the importance of bodily pain while patients referred to it as relatively less significant. The total ICC was low (2%) indicating poor agreement between MCs and patients. With the exception of physical-functioning, MCs predicted a less optimistic outcome in all of the SF12's subscales in comparison to HFPs. Conclusion: Effective intervention in HFPs requires constructive communication between MCs and patients. The study suggests that caregivers have an insufficient understanding of the expectations of HFPs. More effective communication channels are required in order to better understand HFPs' needs and expectations.

The Suitability of Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes in Older Adults Following a Hip Fracture Using the Short-Form 36 Questionnaire: A Qualitative Description Approach.

Hip-fractures (HF) in older adults are associated with poor outcomes and high costs. Measuring quality-of-care of HF patients has focused on clinical definitions rather than on measuring outcomes that are meaningful to the patient. Healthcare systems worldwide are increasingly interested in patient-reported outcome measures (PROs). The Short-form (SF36) questionnaire is a recommended measure among older adults however it's comprehensiveness and uniqueness for specific patients after a HF is not clear. The aims of this study were to: understand the perspective of the older adults experience following HF, to assess the suitability of the SF36 as a PRO for HF and to determine the best timing for questioning. A qualitative description approach was used. This took place in 2 large academic medical-centers in Israel. The inquiry was done in 2 parts by semi-structured interview. A total 15 HF patients were interviewed. Categories and themes emerging from their responses were similar to the 8 domains of the SF36 questionnaire, but the participants added clarity regarding their own needs for setting goals. In the second part, participants agreed that the SF36 reflected common issues and served as an adequate measure for personal-goal setting. The study encourages patient-centered care in older adults recovering from HF, providing evidence that the SF36 is a suitable tool for measuring PROs in HF patients. Healthcare systems focus on clinical-outcome indicators and do not reflect how the patient views his outcomes. This study provides evidence that care should be customized for each person.