Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prognostic factors for discharge to home and residing at home 12 months after hip fracture: an Anoia hip study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Hip fracture is often associated with loss of physical function and institutionalization. The aim of this study is to describe the prognostic factors for discharge to home and residing there 12 months after a hip fracture.

Methods

A prospective study that includes patients aged ≥ 69 years that live at home before the fracture, admitted from June 1st, 2010, to May 31st, 2013. We registered the demographic data, presurgical function and cognitive assessment, surgical waiting time, type of fracture and complications during hospitalization.

Results

We included 273 patients (mean age 84.8 ± 6.1 years; 80% women), 130 (47.6%) were discharged directly to their own home. The predictors of discharge to home were a lower Geriatrics Dementia Scale score (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.17–1.71; p < 0.001), a higher Barthel Index score at discharge (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.05–1.10; p < 0.001) and a longer hospital stay (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.02–1.27; p = 0.019). At 12 months, 169 (63.5%) were still residing at home. Predictors of residing at home 12 months after the hip fracture were age (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02–1.12; p = 0.010), the discharge Barthel Index score (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.94–0.98; p < 0.001), the Geriatrics Dementia Scale score (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.05–1.52; p = 0.013), the surgical waiting time (OR 3.42; 95% CI 1.077–10.89; p = 0.037) and Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.05–1.55; p = 0.016).

Conclusion

Prognostic factors for discharging to home and remaining there 12 months after a hip fracture are those that reflect a better health condition prior to the fracture and better functionality at the hospital discharge for hip fracture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cummings SR, Melton J (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359:1761–1767. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08657-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pérez-Ros P, Martinez-Arnau FM, Malafarina V et al (2016) A one-year proprioceptive exercise programme reduces the incidence of falls in community-dwelling elderly people: a before–after non-randomised intervention study. Maturitas 94:155–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.09.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim S-M, Moon Y-W, Lim S-J et al (2012) Prediction of survival, second fracture, and functional recovery following the first hip fracture surgery in elderly patients. Bone 50:1343–1350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2012.02.633

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith T, Pelpola K, Ball M et al (2014) Pre-operative indicators for mortality following hip fracture surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing 43:464–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Uriz-Otano F, Pla-Vidal J, Tiberio-Lopez G et al (2016) Factors associated to institutionalization and mortality over three years, in elderly people with a hip fracture—an observational study. Maturitas 89:9–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.04.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mears SC, Kates SL (2015) A guide to improving the care of patients with fragility fractures, edition 2. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 6:58–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458515572697

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Nanjayan SK, John J, Swamy G et al (2014) Predictors of change in “discharge destination” following treatment for fracture neck of femur. Injury 45:1080–1084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.02.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Malafarina V, Reginster J-Y, Cabrerizo S et al (2018) Nutritional status and nutritional treatment are related to outcomes and mortality in older adults with hip fracture. Nutrients 10:555. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10050555

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Rapp K, Büchele G, Dreinhöfer K et al (2019) Epidemiology of hip fractures. Z Gerontol Geriatr 52:10–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-018-1382-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Osnes EK, Lofthus CM, Meyer HE et al (2004) Consequences of hip fracture on activities of daily life and residential needs. Osteoporos Int 15:567–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-003-1583-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Deakin DE, Wenn RT, Moran CG (2008) Factors influencing discharge location following hip fracture. Injury 39:213–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2007.07.012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Uriz-Otano F, Uriz-Otano JI, Malafarina V (2015) Factors associated with short-term functional recovery in elderly people with a hip fracture. Influence of cognitive impairment. J Am Med Dir Assoc 16:215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2014.09.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Vochteloo AJH, Moerman S, Tuinebreijer WE et al (2013) More than half of hip fracture patients do not regain mobility in the first postoperative year. Geriatr Gerontol Int 13:334–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0594.2012.00904.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Duaso E, Formiga F, Marimon P et al (2018) Advantages of care for patients with hip fractures in the acute geriatric unit: hip study Anoia. Geriatr Gerontol Int 18:407–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.13191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nordström P, Thorngren K-G, Hommel A et al (2018) Effects of geriatric team rehabilitation after hip fracture: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Med Dir Assoc 19:840–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2018.05.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW (1965) Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J 14:61–65

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lawton MP, Brody EM (1969) Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 9:179–186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR et al (1984) Clinical gait assessment in the neurologically impaired: reliability and meaningfulness. Phys Ther 64:35–40

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Reisberg B, Ferris SH, de Leon MJ et al (1982) The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia. Am J Psychiatry 139:1136–1139. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.139.9.1136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL et al (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Owens WD, Felts JA, Spitznagel ELJ (1978) ASA physical status classifications: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiology 49:239–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tarazona-Santabalbina FJ, Belenguer-Varea Á, Rovira E et al (2016) Orthogeriatric care: improving patient outcomes. Clin Interv Aging 11:843–856. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S72436

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Duaso E, Formiga F, Marimón P et al (2017) Advantages of care for patients with hip fractures in the acute geriatric unit: hip study Anoia. Geriatr Gerontol Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.13191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Saez Lopez P, Sanchez Hernandez N, Paniagua Tejo S et al (2015) Clinical pathway for hip fracture patients. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol 50:161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regg.2014.11.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Malafarina V, Uriz-Otano F, Malafarina C et al (2017) Effectiveness of nutritional supplementation on sarcopenia and recovery in hip fracture patients. A multi-centre randomized trial. Maturitas 101:42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.04.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gialanella B, Ferlucci C, Monguzzi V et al (2015) Determinants of outcome in hip fracture: role of daily living activities. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 51:253–260

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hayashi H, Iwai M, Matsuoka H et al (2016) Factors affecting the discharge destination of hip fracture patients who live alone and have been admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation unit. J Phys Ther Sci 28:1228–1232. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.28.1228

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Hagino T, Ochiai S, Sato E et al (2011) Prognostic prediction in patients with hip fracture: risk factors predicting difficulties with discharge to own home. J Orthop Traumatol 12:77–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-011-0138-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Prestmo A, Hagen G, Sletvold O et al (2015) Comprehensive geriatric care for patients with hip fractures: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet 385:1623–1633. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62409-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sharrock MN, Davies RM, Smith P et al (2016) Factors that affect fractured neck of femur outcome: clinical commissioning groups influence length of stay and discharge destination. Injury 47:444–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2015.12.024

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Stenqvist C, Madsen CM, Riis T et al (2016) Orthogeriatric service reduces mortality in patients with hip fracture. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 7:67–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458515625296

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Schaller F, Sidelnikov E, Theiler R et al (2012) Mild to moderate cognitive impairment is a major risk factor for mortality and nursing home admission in the first year after hip fracture. Bone 51:347–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2012.06.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Parker MJ, Palmer CR (1995) Prediction of rehabilitation after hip fracture. Age Ageing 24:96–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/24.2.96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sletvold O, Helbostad JL, Thingstad P et al (2011) Effect of in-hospital comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in older people with hip fracture. The protocol of the Trondheim Hip Fracture Trial. BMC Geriatr 11:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-11-18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Kates SL, Mendelson DA, Friedman SM (2010) Co-managed care for fragility hip fractures (Rochester model). Osteoporos Int 21:S621–S625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1417-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ramason R, Chong MS, Chan W et al (2014) Innovations in hip fracture care: a comparison of geriatric fracture centers. J Am Med Dir Assoc 15:232–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2014.01.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Baroni M, Serra R, Boccardi V et al (2019) The orthogeriatric comanagement improves clinical outcomes of hip fracture in older adults. Osteoporos Int 30:907–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04858-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Middleton M, Wan B, da Assunçāo R (2016) Improving hip fracture outcomes with integrated orthogeriatric care: a comparison between two accepted orthogeriatric models. Age Ageing 46:465–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw232

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Acute Geriatric Unit, Geriatrics Service, Department of Geriatrics, Igualada Hospital, Avenida Cataluña, 11, 08700, Igualada, Barcelona, Spain

    Andrés Gamboa-Arango, Enric Duaso, Montserrat Sandiumenge, Enrique Escalante, Célia Lumbreras & Anna Tarrida

  2. Department of Geriatrics, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

    Vincenzo Malafarina

  3. Department of Nutrition, Food Science and Physiology, School of Pharmacy, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

    Vincenzo Malafarina

  4. Geriatrics Program, Internal Medicine, IDIBELL, University Bellvitge Hospital, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain

    Francesc Formiga

  5. Acute Geriatric Unit, Traumatology and Orthopedic Surgery, Igualada Hospital, Igualada, Spain

    Patrícia Marimón

  6. Physiotherapy Service, St. Joseph Health Foundation of Igualada, Igualada, Spain

    Maria-Teresa Salgado

Authors
  1. Andrés Gamboa-Arango
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Enric Duaso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vincenzo Malafarina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francesc Formiga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Patrícia Marimón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Montserrat Sandiumenge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Maria-Teresa Salgado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Enrique Escalante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Célia Lumbreras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Anna Tarrida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AG-A and ED: Study concept and design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript. All authors’: Acquisition of data. AG-A, ED, VM, FF: Analysis and interpretation of data. AG-A, ED, VM: Drafting of the manuscript. ED, VM: Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrés Gamboa-Arango.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Vincenzo Malafarina has received lecture fees and honoraria from Rovi, Lacer, Novartis, Nestle Healthcare, Abbott nutrition, Nutricia, Grünenthal, Ferrer; research grants from Nutricia. The others authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.

Statement of human and animal rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Ethics Committee of the Hospital of Bellvitge, Barcelona (PR197/13)) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the author.

Informed consent

Verbal consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study (in the case of dementia, the consent of the responsible family member and/or guardian).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gamboa-Arango, A., Duaso, E., Malafarina, V. et al. Prognostic factors for discharge to home and residing at home 12 months after hip fracture: an Anoia hip study. Aging Clin Exp Res 32, 925–933 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01273-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01273-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation