ReviewClinical interventions in aging2025
Advancements in the Optimization of Surgical Timing in Elderly Patients with Hip Fractures: A Narrative Review and Future Perspectives.
Review in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early versus delayed hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a comparative study on multidimensional recovery.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal timing for hip fracture surgery in elderly patients remains a topic of intense debate and complexity, with many factors influencing the decision-making process. This review examines the current evidence, exploring the advantages and challenges of early versus delayed intervention. It considers medical stability, preoperative medical stabilization, and patient comorbidities, and logistical challenges such as operating room availability and specialized physician access. While multiple studies have examined early versus delayed surgery, a universally agreed definition of "unacceptable delay" is absent. Some evidence indicates that postponing surgery beyond 24 hours may not significantly impact mortality and complication rates, especially in individuals with complex medical conditions. Conversely, early intervention within 48 hours is often recommended for stable patients. Several contributing factors, such as preoperative medical stabilization, hospital resources, and organizational structures, further complicate the issue. This review highlights the need for a nuanced, individualized, and patient-centered approach, taking into account the unique needs of each patient and the specific circumstances of the healthcare setting. It also emphasizes the importance of further research to provide a more comprehensive understanding of what constitutes an optimal delay, rather than adhering to rigid time frames. By offering a multifaceted examination of this critical subject, the review contributes valuable insights that may guide future clinical practice and policy in orthopedic care.
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.