Observational studyInternational orthopaedics2015
Subsequent contralateral hip fractures: can at-risk patients be identified? An observational study of 5,102 patients.
Observational study in International orthopaedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment gaps in osteoporosis care following recurrent fractures: a nationwide cohort study.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Analysis of Risk Factors and Consequences of Consecutive Proximal Femur Fractures in Elderly Patients.Cureus · 2021Article
- Epidemiology and risk factors for contralateral proximal femur fracture: a single center retrospective cohort study on 1022 patients.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Comparative analysis of non-simultaneous bilateral fractures of the proximal femur.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2019Article
- Contra-lateral hip fracture in the elderly: are decreased body mass index and skin thickness predictive factors?International orthopaedics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate a sample of patients who sustained hip fractures during the years 1997-2011 and identify risk factors for a subsequent contralateral hip fracture; one-year mortality rates were compared in both groups.
methodsA total of 5,102 patients with hip fractures were prospectively studied to identify patients who had also suffered a subsequent, contralateral, hip fracture (SCHF). Those patients who had sustained a second fracture within 18 months of the initial fracture were then studied. All data were statistically processed.
resultsWithin 18 months of the first fracture, a SCHF occurred in 105 patients (2.1 %). These patients were an average of three years older than those in the single fracture group. Risk factors for the development of a SCHF included: female gender, residing in a residential care facility, and limited mobility prior to injury. Trochanteric fractures did not represent a statistically significant risk factor for SCHF. More than three-quarters of patients with subsequent injuries suffered the same type of fractures on the opposite side. Patients with subsequent fractures had lower one-year mortality rates than patients with only one fracture.
conclusionPatients at greatest risk for a SCHF were women with limited mobility who resided in nursing homes for the elderly. The lower mortality rate associated with second fractures shows that the prognosis for such patients is good. Since the at-risk group is so well defined, prophylactic measures for these patients should be utilized in order to minimize the risk of additional fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.