Beyond Hip Fractures: Other Fragility Fractures’ Associated Mortality, Functional and Economic Importance: A 2-year-Follow-up.

Background Hip fractures are well researched in orthogeriatric literature. Equivalent investigations for fragility-associated periprosthetic and periosteosynthetic femoral, ankle joint, pelvic ring, and rib fractures are still rare. The purpose of this study was to evaluate mortality, functional out...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Andreas Wiedl MED, Stefan Förch MED, Alexander Otto MED, Leonard Lisitano MED, Kim Rau MED, Thilo Nachbaur MED, Edgar Mayr MED, HC
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: SAGE Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/1c640e4eeba44450bf7336ce42bada2c
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Background Hip fractures are well researched in orthogeriatric literature. Equivalent investigations for fragility-associated periprosthetic and periosteosynthetic femoral, ankle joint, pelvic ring, and rib fractures are still rare. The purpose of this study was to evaluate mortality, functional outcome, and socioeconomic parameters associated to the upper-mentioned fragility fractures prospectively in a 2-year follow-up. Methods Over the course of a year, all periprosthetic and periosteosynthetic femoral fractures (PPFF), ankle joint fractures (AJ), pelvic ring fractures (PR), and rib fractures (RF), that were treated on a co-managed orthogeriatric ward, were assessed. Parker Mobility Score (PMS), Barthel Index (BI), place of residence, and care level were recorded. After 2 years, patients and/or relatives were contacted by mailed questionnaires or phone calls in order to calculate mortality and reevaluate the mentioned parameters. Results Follow-up rate was 77.7%, assessing 87 patients overall. The relative mortality risk was significantly increased for PR (2.9 (95% CI: 1.5–5.4)) and PPFF (3.5 (95% CI: 1.2–5.8)) but not for RF (1.5 (95% CI: 0.4–2.6)) and AJ (2.0 (95% CI: 0.0–4.0)). Every fracture group except AJ showed significantly higher BI on average at follow-up. PMS was, respectively, reduced on average for PR and RF insignificantly, but significantly for PPFF and AJ in comparison to pre-hospital values. 10.0–27.3% (each group) of patients had to leave their homes permanently; care levels were raised in 30.0–61.5% of cases. Discussion This investigation provides a perspective for further larger examinations. PR and PPFF correlate with significant increased mortality risk. Patients suffering from PPFF, PR, and RF were able to significantly recover in their activities of daily living. AJ and PPFF conclude in significant reduction of PMS after 2 years. Conclusion Any fragility fracture has its impact on mortality, function, and socioeconomic aspects and shall not be underestimated. Despite some fractures not being the most common, they are still present in daily practice.