Effect of an additional health-professional-led exercise programme on clinical health outcomes after hip fracture

Prediction of walking speed one year following hip fracture based on pre-fracture assessments of mobility and physical activity

BACKGROUND

Older people with hip fracture are often medically frail, and many do not regain their walking ability and level of physical activity. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between pre-fracture recalled mobility, fear of falling, physical activity, walking habits and walking speed one year after hip fracture.

METHODS

The study had a longitudinal design. Measurements were performed 3-5 days postoperatively (baseline) and at one year after the hip fracture. The measurements at baseline were all subjective outcome measures recalled from pre-fracture: The New Mobility Scale (NMS), the 'Walking Habits' questionnaire, The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Scale, Fear of Falling International (FES-I) and demographic variables. At one year 4-meter walking speed, which was a part of the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) was assessed.

RESULTS

At baseline 207 participants were included and 151 were assessed after one year. Their age was mean (SD) 82.7 (8.3) years (range 65-99 years). Those with the fastest walking speed at one year had a pre-fracture habit of regular walks with a duration of ≥ 30 min and/or a frequency of regular walks of 5-7 days a week. Age (p =.020), number of comorbidities (p <.001), recalled NMS (p <.001), and recalled UCLA Activity Scale (p =.007) were identified as predictors of walking speed at one year. The total model explained 54% of the variance in walking speed.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration and frequency of regular walks before the hip fracture play a role in walking speed recovery one year following the fracture. Subjective outcome measures of mobility and physical activity, recalled from pre-fracture can predict walking speed at one year. They are gentle on the old and medically frail patients in the acute phase after hip fracture, as well as clinically less time consuming.

Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults

BACKGROUND

Improving mobility outcomes after hip fracture is key to recovery. Possible strategies include gait training, exercise and muscle stimulation. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions aimed at improving mobility and physical functioning after hip fracture surgery in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trial registers and reference lists, to March 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials assessing mobility strategies after hip fracture surgery. Eligible strategies aimed to improve mobility and included care programmes, exercise (gait, balance and functional training, resistance/strength training, endurance, flexibility, three-dimensional (3D) exercise and general physical activity) or muscle stimulation. Intervention was compared with usual care (in-hospital) or with usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit (post-hospital).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Members of the review author team independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used the assessment time point closest to four months for in-hospital studies, and the time point closest to the end of the intervention for post-hospital studies. Critical outcomes were mobility, walking speed, functioning, health-related quality of life, mortality, adverse effects and return to living at pre-fracture residence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 4059 participants from 17 countries. On average, participants were 80 years old and 80% were women. The median number of study participants was 81 and all trials had unclear or high risk of bias for one or more domains. Most trials excluded people with cognitive impairment (70%), immobility and/or medical conditions affecting mobility (72%). In-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Eighteen trials (1433 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care) in hospitals. Overall, such strategies may lead to a moderate, clinically-meaningful increase in mobility (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.96; 7 studies, 507 participants; low-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed (CI crosses zero so does not rule out a lack of effect (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.37; 6 studies, 360 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to short-term (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.30; 6 studies, 489 participants; low-certainty evidence) or long-term mortality (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.12; 2 studies, 133 participants; low-certainty evidence), adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.11; 4 studies, 322 participants; low-certainty evidence), or return to pre-fracture residence (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.56; 2 studies, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether mobility strategies improve functioning or health-related quality of life as the certainty of evidence was very low. Gait, balance and functional training probably causes a moderate improvement in mobility (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.06; 6 studies, 463 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference in effects on mobility for resistance training. No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes. Post-hospital setting, mobility strategy versus control Twenty-two trials (2626 participants) compared mobility strategies with control (usual care, no intervention, sham exercise or social visit) in the post-hospital setting. Mobility strategies lead to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.54; 7 studies, 761 participants; high-certainty evidence) and a small, clinically meaningful improvement in walking speed compared to control (SMD 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29; 14 studies, 1067 participants; high-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies lead to a small, non-clinically meaningful increase in functioning (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.36; 9 studies, 936 participants; high-certainty evidence), and probably lead to a slight increase in quality of life that may not be clinically meaningful (SMD 0.14, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.29; 10 studies, 785 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies probably make little or no difference to short-term mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.06; 8 studies, 737 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mobility strategies may make little or no difference to long-term mortality (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; 4 studies, 588 participants; low-certainty evidence) or adverse events measured by hospital re-admission (95% CI includes a large reduction and large increase, RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.42; 2 studies, 206 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving gait, balance and functional exercise leads to a small, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.36; 5 studies, 621 participants; high-certainty evidence), while training classified as being primarily resistance or strength exercise may lead to a clinically meaningful increase in mobility measured using distance walked in six minutes (mean difference (MD) 55.65, 95% CI 28.58 to 82.72; 3 studies, 198 participants; low-certainty evidence). Training involving multiple intervention components probably leads to a substantial, clinically meaningful increase in mobility (SMD 0.94, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.34; 2 studies, 104 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of aerobic training on mobility (very low-certainty evidence). No studies of other types of exercise or electrical stimulation reported mobility outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions targeting improvement in mobility after hip fracture may cause clinically meaningful improvement in mobility and walking speed in hospital and post-hospital settings, compared with conventional care. Interventions that include training of gait, balance and functional tasks are particularly effective. There was little or no between-group difference in the number of adverse events reported. Future trials should include long-term follow-up and economic outcomes, determine the relative impact of different types of exercise and establish effectiveness in emerging economies.

Recovery and prediction of physical function 1 year following hip fracture

Objectives

To investigate the recovery of physical function, health related quality of life (HRQoL), and pain for people following hip fracture for the initial 12 months, and to examine whether postoperative outcome measures of physical function, HRQoL, and pain can predict physical function at 3 and 12 months.

Design

A prospective single‐center observational study, as part of the HIPFRAC trial. Settings: One hospital with two associated municipalities in Norway. Subjects: 207 participants with hip fracture included in the study (140 participants transferred to a short‐term nursing home placement and 67 transferred directly home at discharge from hospital).

Method

Outcome measures were Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Timed Up & Go (TUG), Stair climbing test (SC), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain at rest and in activity, and EQ‐5D‐5L index and health score. Data were analysed by repeated measures of variance and multivariate regression analyses.

Results

There were statistically significant improvements in physical function (SPPB total score and TUG), NRS‐pain in activity, and HRQoL (EQ‐5D‐5L) from hospital discharge to 3‐month follow‐up for the whole cohort and the two groups (p < 0.001). However, the largest improvements occurred within the first 3 months. Further statistically significant improvements occurred between 3 and 12 months (p < 0.05). The strongest predictors of physical function at 3 and 12 months post‐fracture were physical function (SPPB) at hospital discharge and pre‐fracture requirement of a walking aid.

Conclusion

The recovery of physical function, HRQoL, and pain in participants after hip fracture indicates gradual improvements during the initial 12‐month follow‐up, with the largest improvements within the first 3 months.

Compliance of functional exercises in school-age children with limb fractures: implication for nursing countermeasures

Background

Functional exercises is very essential to the recovery of patients with fracture. We aimed to evaluate the compliance of functional exercises in school-age children with limb fracture, to provide evidence to the clinical management and nursing care of children with limb fracture.

Methods

School-age children with limb fractures treated in our hospital from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021 were selected. The characteristics and postoperative functional exercise compliance of included children were analyzed. Pearson correlation and Logistic regression analysis were conducted to analyze the influencing factors of compliance to functional exercises.

Results

A total of 328 children with limb fracture were included, the incidence of compliance to functional exercise was only 35.98%. Pearson correlation analysis showed that age(r = 0.707), only child of family(r = 0.537), guardians(r = 0.642) and type of temperament(r = 0.635) were correlated with compliance to functional exercises in school-age children with limb fractures (all p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis indicated that age ≤ 10y (OR2.913, 95%CI2.091 ~ 3.611), only child of family (OR2.006, 95%CI1.683 ~ 2.558), guarded by grandparents (OR1.512, 95%CI1.201 ~ 2.118), non-easy-going temperament (OR4.127, 95%CI3.811 ~ 4.902) were the influencing factors of non-compliance to functional exercises in children with limb fracture (all p < 0.05).

Conclusions

School-age children have poor compliance with functional exercises after limb fractures, and there are many influencing factors. For children with those risks, health care providers should actively intervene in nursing to improve children’s exercise compliance and the rehabilitation effect.