ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
A comparison of general versus regional anesthesia for hip fracture surgery: a meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing perioperative outcomes between regional anesthesia and general anesthesia in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of Neuraxial and general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Pooled it
- Surgery vs conservative treatment for type II and III odontoid fractures in a geriatric population: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pericapsular nerve group block versus fascia iliaca block for perioperative analgesia in hip fracture surgery: a prospective randomized trial.The Pan African medical journal · 2023Trial
- Determination of the median effective dose (EDDer Anaesthesist · 2017Trial
- Factors Predicting Ambulatory Status at Discharge After Fragility Hip Fracture Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Mortality in orthopedic patients: a retrospective review of 333 medical records.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Clinical Characteristics of Spinal versus General Anaesthesia in Older Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Repair Surgery in Jordan: A Multicentre Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of anesthesia type on hip fracture post-surgery outcomes.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2022Article
- Article
- Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to compare the effect of general versus regional anesthesia on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture. Randomized controlled trials, prospective studies and retrospective observational studies were searched in PubMed, Medline and Embase database published between January 2005 and March 2014. The overall outcome was measured by odds ratios (ORs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 7 trials, involving 36448 patients received general anesthesia and 33952 patients received regional anesthesia, were included in present meta-analysis. We found that the 30-day mortality rate was lower in general anesthesia cases than that in regional cases (5.3% vs. 6.3%). Overall, our results demonstrated that there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between two types of anesthesia in patients with hip fracture surgery (RR=0.98, 95% CI=0.92-1.04, P=0.48), indicating that types of anesthesia might not be a risk factor for hip fracture surgery. No statistically significant difference was observed in other outcome measures (P>0.05). In conclusion, our results suggested that the choice of anesthesia (general or regional) should be made by the anesthesiologist on an individual basis and based on the patient's medical conditions. Further research is still needed to evaluate the effect of these two anesthesia methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26884943PMC4723788W2406394409What 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.