ArticleCureus2026
Completion of Treatment Escalation Plans and Resuscitation Discussions in Frail and Elderly Patients With Hip Fractures.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Hip fractures disproportionately occur in frail and elderly patients and carry high mortality even with optimal management. The British Orthopaedic Association recommends that all frail and elderly trauma patients have ceilings of treatment (CoTs) and appropriateness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) decided pre-operatively. Our hospital documents these treatment escalation plans (TEPs) within the Resuscitation Council UK's Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms. Methods We sampled the hip fracture population at Burton Hospital orthopaedic ward on random days between October and November 2024. We separately collected data on other patients with a ReSPECT form to see whether omissions on these forms were specific to the hip fracture group or replicated more widely. Results We collected data for 42 patients, including 33 patients admitted with hip fractures and nine non-hip fracture patients. We found that 20 (61%) hip fracture patients had a ReSPECT form that documented the appropriateness of CPR. However, only nine (45%) of these documented an appropriate CoT. This left only nine (27%) hip fracture patients with a full TEP. Out of all decisions documented, 16 (80%) were endorsed by a consultant. In the non-hip fracture group, we found that many ReSPECT forms also lacked a CoT. There was no significant difference in the completion of a CoT on ReSPECT forms between the hip fracture and non-hip fracture groups (p=0.69). Conclusion We found that many patients with a hip fracture did not have a documented recommendation on the appropriateness of CPR, and even fewer had a decision documented on the appropriateness of escalation. This meant that neither area met the standard of 100% set for our audit. This was in part due to the incompletion of the clinical recommendations section on the ReSPECT forms, which we highlight is an often-omitted section in our hospital. Review of the escalation plan within a comprehensive geriatric assessment, and increasing clinician education on TEPs, may help to improve the number of complete treatment escalation plans made.
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.