The quality of life of the elderly is negatively affected by pertrochanteric femoral fractures: a comparative study

Year 2022, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 24 - 30, 04.01.2022

Yüksel Uğur Yaradılmış , Mustafa Caner Okkaoglu , Erdi Özdemir , Ahmet Ateş , İsmail Demirkale , Murat Altay

https://doi.org/10.18621/eurj.819867

Abstract

Objectives: Limited data is available regarding the quality of life of hip fracture patients following surgery. This study examined the mid-term quality of life of hip fracture patients and compared these patients with healthy elderly patients devoid of hip fractures.

Methods: A total of 103 patients (aged > 65 years) with pertrochanteric femoral fractures were treated with proximal femoral nail surgery in our clinic between January 2012 and December 2016. A healthy control group (n = 100) was demographically matched to the patients. The final follow-up visit included their Harris Hip Score and completion of a Short Form-36. The eight sub-parameters from the Short Form-36 form were also assessed.

Results: The mean follow-up time for the patients was 36.4 ± 12.3 (range, 24-72) months. The mean Charlson comorbidity score for the patient group was 4.4 ± 2.1 and the mean Harris Hip Score was 77.24 ± 10.2. The comparison of the Short Form-36 sub-parameters revealed that the quality of life of the patient group was found to be lower than that of the control group for the following parameters physical function, physical roles, vitality, and social function (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Even if the fracture had healed of patients with hip fractures, QoL related to physical and social functions was not improved accordingly, new healthcare policies should be developed for these patients based on the premise that their physical capacity may not be fully regained. Moreover, the importance of hip fracture prevention was demonstrated by this study.

Keywords

Hip fracture, aged, quality of life, Short Form 36, morbidity

References

• 1. Baron JA, Karagas M, Barrett J, Kniffin W, Malenka D, Mayor M, et al. Basic epidemiology of fractures of the upper and lower limb Measuring Recovery After a Hip Fracture 301 among Americans over 65 years of age. Epidemiology 1996;7:612-8.
• 2. Gullberg B, O Johnell, Kanis JA. World-wide projections for hip fracture. Osteoporosis Int 1997;7:407-13.
• 3. Johns WL, Strong B, Kates S, Patel NK. POSSUM and P-POSSUM scoring in hip fracture mortalities. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 2020;11:2151459320931674.
• 4. Kuru T, Olçar HA. Effects of early mobilization and weight bearing on postoperative walking ability and pain in geriatric patients operated due to hip fracture: a retrospective analysis. Turk J Med Sci 2020;50:117-25.
• 5. Moja L, Piatti A, Pecoraro V, Ricci C, Virgili G, Salanti G, et al. Timing matters in hip fracture surgery: patients operated within 48 hours have better outcomes. A meta-analysis and meta-regression of over 190,000 patients. PloS One 2012;7:e46175.
• 6. Karakoyun Ö, Erol M, Küçükkaya M, Demirok M. Intertrochanteric femoral fractures treatment with proximal femoral nail. Int J Basic Clin Med 2014;1;165-70.
• 7. Albayrak A, Bayrak SK, Duramaz A, Kızılkaya C, Seller A, Aslantaş FÇ. [Demographic and clinical results of proximal femoral fractures]. Acta Medica Alanya 2017;1:145-8. [Article in Turkish]
• 8. Müller M, Seitz A, Besch L, Hilgert RE, Seekamp A. [Proximal femur fractures: results and complications after osteosynthesis with PFN and TGN]. Unfallchirurg 2008;111:71-7. [Article in German]
• 9. Kalem M, Kocaoğlu H, Şahin E, Kocaoğlu MH, Başarır K, Kınık H. Impact of echocardiography on one-month and one-year mortality of intertrochanteric fracture patients. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2018;52:97-100.
• 10. Peterson MGE, Allegrante JP, Cornell CN, MacKenzie CR, Robbins L, Horton R, et al. Measuring recovery after a hip fracture using the SF-36 and Cummings scales. Osteoporosis Int 2002;13;296-302.
• 11. Giessauf C, Glehr M, Bernhardt GA, Seibert FJ, Gruber K, Sadoghi P, et. al. Quality of life after pertrochanteric femoral fractures treated with a gamma nail: a single center study of 62 patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2012;13:214.
• 12. Yaozeng X, Dechun G, Huilin Y, Guangming Z, Xianbin W. Comparative study of trochanteric fracture treated with the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation and the third generation of gamma nail. Injury 2010:41;1234-8
• 13. Fogagnolo F, Kfuri M Jr, Paccola CA. Intramedullary fixation of pertrochanteric hip fractures with the short AO-ASIF proximal femoral nail. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2004;124:31-7.
• 14. Baumgaertner MR, Solberg BD. Awareness of tip-apex distance reduces failure of fixation of trochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997:79:969-71.
• 15. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969;51:737-55.
• 16. Ware JEJ, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-83.
• 17. Baumgaertner M. Intertrochanteric hip fractures, Skeletal Trauma 2003;2:1776-816.
• 18. Rohde G, Haugeberg G, Mengshoel AM, Moum T, Wahl AK. Two-year changes in quality of life in elderly patients with low-energy hip fractures. A case-control study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010;11:226.
• 19. Demiral Y, Ergor G, Unal B, Semin S, Akvardar Y. Normative data and discriminative properties of short form 36 (SF-36) in Turkish urban population. BMC Public Health 2006;6:247.
• 20. Hallberg I, Rosenqvist AM, Kartous L, Löfman O, Wahlström O, Toss G. Health-related quality of life after osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 2004;15:834-41.
• 21. Scholten AC, Haagsma JA, Steyerberg EW, van Beeck EF, Polinder S. Assessment of pre-injury health-related quality of life: a systematic review. Popul Health Metr 2017;15:10.
• 22. Koval KJ, Skovron ML, Aharonoff GB, Zuckerman JD. Predictors of functional recovery after hip fracture in the elderly. Clin Orthop 1998;348:22-8.
• 23. Fox HJ, Pooler J, Prothero D, Bannister GC. Factors affecting the outcome after proximal femoral fractures. Injury 1994;25;297-300.