Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11034731›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Nutritional supplementation for hip fracture aftercare in the elderly.

A Avenell, H H Handoll

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Nutritional supplementation for hip fracture aftercare in older people.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Matters We Metric Vs. Metrics that Matter.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Extracts from "clinical evidence": hip fracture.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

A AvenellHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK, AB25 2ZD. a.avenell@abdn.ac.uk
H H Handoll

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFractures of the hip are an important cause of later ill health and mortality in elderly people. People with hip fractures are often malnourished at the time of fracture, and have poor food intake in hospital.

objectivesThis review assesses the effects of nutritional interventions in elderly people recovering from hip fracture. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Embase, Biosis, Cinahl, Healthstar and reference lists. We contacted investigators, and hand searched The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Clinical Nutrition and The Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Date of the most recent search: January 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of nutritional interventions of mainly older patients (aged over 65 years) with hip fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial allocation to included, excluded and awaiting assessment categories, was by consensus. Both reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Additional information was sought from all trialists. Pooling of data for primary outcomes and select exploratory analyses were undertaken. MAIN

resultsFifteen randomised trials involving 1054 participants were included. Overall the quality of trials was poor; specifically in terms of allocation concealment, assessor blinding and intention to treat analysis. This, and the limited availability of outcome data, mean that the following results must be interpreted with caution. Oral multinutrient feeds (providing non-protein energy, protein, some vitamins and minerals), evaluated by five trials, may reduce unfavourable outcome (death or complications) (14/66 versus 26/73; relative risk 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.84), but did not demonstrate an effect on mortality (12/91 versus 14/97; relative risk 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 1.70). Four trials, examining nasogastric multinutrient feeding, showed no evidence for an effect on mortality (relative risk 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 1.97), but the studies were heterogeneous regarding case-mix. Insufficient information was provided to evaluate unfavourable outcome. The effect of protein in an oral feed, tested in three trials, showed no evidence for an effect on mortality (relative risk 1.38, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 2.34). It may have reduced the number of long term complications and days spent in rehabilitation wards. Two trials, testing intravenous thiamin (vitamin B1) and other water soluble vitamins, or 1-alpha-hydroxycholecalciferol (an active form of vitamin D) respectively, produced no evidence of benefit for either vitamin supplement. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThe strongest evidence for the effectiveness of nutritional supplementation exists for oral protein and energy feeds, but the evidence is still very weak. Future trials are required which overcome the defects of the reviewed studies, particularly inadequate size, methodology and outcome assessment.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsNutritional SupportAgedHip FracturesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.