Determinants of functional outcome in hip fracture: the role of comorbidity
Background and aims
Executed studies did not clearly identify which index of comorbidity was an independent outcome determinant. The aim of this prospective observational cohort study was to address this issue.
We analyzed 200 consecutive patients with hip fracture. All patients underwent rehabilitation. At admission comorbidity was assessed through the cumulative severity, severity index, and comorbidity index of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. Discharge scores and effectiveness in the Functional Independence Measure motor subscale, and discharge destination were the outcome measures. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify determinants of outcome.
Mini Mental State Examination and comorbidity index of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale were important independent determinants of final (respectively, β = 0.46 and −0.25) and effectiveness (respectively, β = 0.47 and −0.25) in motor Functional Independence Measure scores, while hip strength and Rankin score were determinants of final motor Functional Independence Measure score (respectively, β = 0.21 and −0.20). Comorbidity index of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (odds ratio 8.18 for ≥3 versus < 3 comorbidity score; 95% confidence interval, 1.03–64.7) and Geriatric Depression Scale (odds ratio 4.02 for ≥6 versus ≤5 depression scale score; 95% confidence interval, 1.52–10.63) were risk indicators for nursing home.
Among the indices of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale, comorbidity index is the sole independent determinant of both motor Functional Independence Measure scores and discharge destination in hip fracture patients. This suggests to specifically evaluate this index to identify the patients who may be admitted to a rehabilitation program.
KeywordsComorbidity Activities of daily living Outcome Rehabilitation
The authors thank Rosemary Allpress for English revision of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The research was not supported by Pharmaceutical Companies, but by institutional funding.
The Technical Scientific Committee of our Institute approved the study protocol. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
All patients gave their written informed consent to participate.
- 11.Miller DW, Hahn JF (1996) General methods of clinical examination. In: Youmans JR (ed). Neurological surgery, ed 4. W.B. Saunders Philapdelphia, pp 31–32Google Scholar
- 14.Di Giorgio L, Sodano L, Touloupakis G, Piciocco P, Attala D, Villani C (2012) Proximal femur fractures in elderly patients: the influence of comorbidity on prognosis in the short, medium and long term. Clin Ter 163:95–99Google Scholar
- 26.Thorngren KG, Ceder L, Svensson K (1993) Predicting results of rehabilitation after hip fracture. A ten-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res (287):76–81Google Scholar