Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38070926›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2023

Hospital-based caregiver intervention for people following hip fracture surgery (HIP HELPER): multicentre randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded qualitative study in England.

Toby O Smith, Reema Khoury, Sarah Hanson, Allie Welsh, Kelly Grant, Allan B Clark, Polly-Anna Ashford, Sally Hopewell, K Pfeiffer, Phillipa Logan and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

14 authors.

Toby O SmithWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK toby.smith@uea.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1673-2954
Reema KhouryNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Sarah HansonSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4751-8248
Allie WelshSchool of Education, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8278-6673
Kelly GrantNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Allan B ClarkNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Polly-Anna AshfordNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Sally HopewellNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6881-6984
K PfeifferDepartment of Clinical Gerontology and Geriatric Rehabilitation, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Phillipa LoganSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Maria CrottyCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Matthew L CostaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sarah LambNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
HIP HELPER Study Collaborators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an informal caregiver training programme to support the recovery of people following hip fracture surgery.

designTwo-arm, multicentre, pragmatic, open, feasibility RCT with embedded qualitative study.

settingNational Health Service (NHS) providers in five English hospitals.

participantsCommunity-dwelling adults, aged 60 years and over, who undergo hip fracture surgery and their informal caregivers.

interventionUsual care: usual NHS care. EXPERIMENTAL: usual NHS care RANDOMISATION AND BLINDING: Central randomisation was computer generated (1:1), stratified by hospital and level of patient cognitive impairment. There was no blinding.

main outcome measuresData collected at baseline and 4 months post randomisation included: screening logs, intervention logs, fidelity checklists, acceptability data and clinical outcomes. Interviews were conducted with a subset of participants and health professionals.

results102 participants were enrolled (51 patients; 51 caregivers). Thirty-nine per cent (515/1311) of patients screened were eligible. Eleven per cent (56/515) of eligible patients consented to be randomised. Forty-eight per cent (12/25) of the intervention group reached compliance to their allocated intervention. There was no evidence of treatment contamination. Qualitative data demonstrated the trial and HIP HELPER programme was acceptable.

conclusionsThe HIP HELPER programme was acceptable to patient-caregiver dyads and health professionals. The COVID-19 pandemic impacting on site's ability to deliver the research. Modifications are necessary to the design for a viable definitive RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13270387.

Indexed as

CaregiversHip FracturesAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandFeasibility StudiesHospitalsHumansMiddle AgedQuality of Lifehipnursing careorthopaedic & trauma surgeryrehabilitation medicine

Identifiers

PMID38070926
PMCPMC10729129

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.