ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2026
How does the level of care change after proximal humeral fracture in older patients? A propensity score matching analysis.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn the context of an aging population, the impact of surgical versus non-operative treatment for proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) on level of care (LoC) in older adults remains poorly understood.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed claims data from the German BARMER health insurance fund, including patients aged ≥ 65 years with PHF (ICD S42.2) between 01/2017 and 09/2022. Patients were categorized into non-operative or surgical treatment groups, with surgery further divided into locked-plate fixation (LPF), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), and other. A 1:1 propensity score matching adjusted for age, sex, pre-fracture LoC, year of fracture, and risk profile was performed. Primary endpoints were overall survival, LoC deterioration, and nursing home care. Hazard ratios were estimated using Cox proportional hazards or Fine and Gray models to account for competing risks.
resultsAmong 54,595 patients (median age 79, 84% female), 44.3% underwent surgery. After matching (31,314 patients), 21.3% of patients experienced LoC deterioration one year after PHF. RTSA was associated with increased risk of LoC worsening (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.31-1.50), while LPF showed no difference compared to non-operative treatment. Risk for progression to severe care dependency (LoC ≥ 3) or nursing home care did not differ between treatment groups. Surgical treatment was associated with reduced overall mortality (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.84-0.91).
conclusionWhile RTSA was associated with a higher risk of LoC deterioration, differences in severe care dependency were not observed. Surgical treatment was linked to lower mortality, supporting individualized treatment decisions that consider both survival and long-term care outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
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.