ArticleBritish journal of pain2022
Cognitive impairment and pain relief following hip fractures: a case control study.
Article in British journal of pain, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns of Discharge Analgesic Prescription in Hip Fracture Patients by Label of Cognitive Status: A Retrospective Pilot Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hip fractures represent a significant workload of both emergency and orthopaedic departments within the National Health Service (NHS). Pain relief is key in treating hip fractures as highlighted by both National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) and British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma (BOAST) guidelines. However, the literature shows that patients with cognitive impairment tend to have inconsistent pain management, leading to worse outcomes. We conducted a case-control study looking at 296 patients who presented with hip fractures to a major trauma centre between 1 December 2019 and 30 May 2020. Cognition was assessed using pre-recorded Abbreviated Mental Test Scores (AMTS). There was no significant difference between pain relief provided to patients with or without cognitive impairment in both the pre-hospital (p = 0.208) and Accident & Emergency (A&E) (p = 0.154) setting. A larger proportion of patients in A&E did not receive any pain relief (18.6% versus 42.2%). Pre-hospital, the higher the pain score, the stronger the analgesia given (R = 0.435, p = 0.000). This relationship was present in both the cognitively impaired (R = 0.572, p = 0.000) and cognitively intact groups (R = 0.390 p = 0.000). Strength of analgesia and pain scores did not correlate in A&E (R = 0.014, p = 0.826). Cognition did not impact the time to analgesia both pre-hospital (p = 0.291) and in A&E (p = 0.332); however, patients waited significantly longer to receive pain relief in A&E (29.61 minutes versus 150.28 minutes). Fascia-iliaca blocks were administered to 58.4% of the cohort, with no significant difference noted between cognition status. Overall, cognition does not impact pain management both pre-hospital and in A&E. There is still room for improvement, particularly in the assessment of pain in the cognitively impaired. A possible solution is the utilisation of the Bolton Pain Assessment Tool, a validated pain assessment tool for the cognitively impaired that has been utilised in the trauma setting with good effect.
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.