Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31703579›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2019

The value of nonoperative versus operative treatment of frail institutionalized elderly patients with a proximal femoral fracture in the shade of life (FRAIL-HIP); protocol for a multicenter observational cohort study.

Pieter Joosse, Sverre A I Loggers, C L P Marc Van de Ree, Romke Van Balen, Jeroen Steens, Rutger G Zuurmond, Taco Gosens, Sven H Van Helden, Suzanne Polinder, Hanna C Willems and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Nonoperative versus operative management of frail institutionalized older patients with a proximal femoral fracture: a cost-utility analysis alongside a multicenter prospective cohort study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Trends in data quality and quality indicators 5 years after implementation of the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Pieter JoosseDepartment of Surgery, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, P.O Box 501, 1800 AM, Alkmaar, The Netherlands.
Sverre A I LoggersDepartment of Surgery, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, P.O Box 501, 1800 AM, Alkmaar, The Netherlands.
C L P Marc Van de ReeDepartment Trauma TopCare, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, P.O. Box 90151, 5000 LC, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Romke Van BalenDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Hippocratespad 21, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jeroen SteensDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dijklander Ziekenhuis (location Westfriesgasthuis), P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR, Hoorn, The Netherlands.
Rutger G ZuurmondDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Isala, P.O. Box 10400, 8000 GK, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Taco GosensDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, P.O. Box 90151, 5000 LC, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Sven H Van HeldenDepartment of Surgery, Isala, P.O. Box 10400, 8000 GK, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Suzanne PolinderDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hanna C WillemsGeriatrics Section, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam UMC location AMC, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther M M Van LieshoutTrauma Research Unit, Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. e.vanlieshout@erasmusmc.nl.
FRAIL-HIP study group
Erasmus MC · NLIsala · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLNoordwest Ziekenhuisgroep · NLWaterlandziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProximal femoral fractures are strongly associated with morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Mortality is highest among frail institutionalized elderly with both physical and cognitive comorbidities who consequently have a limited life expectancy. Evidence based guidelines on whether or not to operate on these patients in the case of a proximal femoral fracture are lacking. Practice variation occurs, and it remains unknown if nonoperative treatment would result in at least the same quality of life as operative treatment. This study aims to determine the effect of nonoperative management versus operative management of proximal femoral fractures in a selected group of frail institutionalized elderly on the quality of life, level of pain, rate of complications, time to death, satisfaction of the patient (or proxy) and the caregiver with the management strategy, and health care consumption.

methodsThis is a multicenter, observational cohort study. Frail institutionalized elderly (70 years or older with a body mass index < 18.5, a Functional Ambulation Category of 2 or lower pre-trauma, or an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 4 or 5), who sustained a proximal femoral fracture are eligible to participate. Patients with a pathological or periprosthetic fractures and known metastatic oncological disease will be excluded. Treatment decision will be reached following a structured shared decision process. The primary outcome is quality of life (Euro-QoL; EQ-5D-5 L). Secondary outcome measures are quality of life measured with the QUALIDEM, pain level (PACSLAC), pain medication use, treatment satisfaction of patient (or proxy) and caregivers, quality of dying (QODD), time to death, and direct medical costs. A cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis will be done, using the EQ-5D utility score and QUALIDEM score, respectively. Non-inferiority of nonoperative treatment is assumed with a limit of 0.15 on the EQ-5D score. Data will be acquired at 7, 14, and 30 days and at 3 and 6 months after trauma. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will provide insight into the true value of nonoperative treatment of proximal femoral fractures in frail elderly with a limited life expectancy. The results may be used for updating (inter)national treatment guidelines.

trial registrationThe study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR7245; date 10-06-2018).

Indexed as

Femoral FracturesFrailtyQuality of LifeAgedConservative TreatmentConsumer BehaviorFemaleHumansInstitutionalizationLife ExpectancyMaleNetherlandsObservational Studies as TopicOrthopedic ProceduresPatient SelectionElderlyFrailtyHip fractureNonoperative treatmentNursing homeOperative treatmentPalliative careProximal femoral fractureQuality of lifeSurgery

Identifiers

PMID31703579
PMCPMC6839183
OpenAlexW2985749045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.