Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-reported outcome measures in older people with hip fracture: a systematic review of quality and acceptability

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Hip fracture is the most common serious injury of older people, often resulting in reduced mobility and loss of independence. However, guidance for the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) does not exist: we describe the first review to apply internationally endorsed criteria in support of PROM quality and acceptability in this group, and make recommendations for future applications.

Methods

Systematic literature searches of major databases (1980–2015) to identify published evidence of the application and quality of clearly defined measures. Evidence of measurement and practical properties, and the extent of active patient involvement, was sought. Study and PROM quality was assessed against recommended criteria.

Results

Seventy-one articles relating to 28 PROMs (Generic n = 12; Specific n = 16) were included. The SF-36 (v1) and EuroQoL EQ-5D 3L were the most widely evaluated measures with acceptable evidence of measurement properties, but limited evaluations of practical properties or relevance to this group. Evidence was mostly limited for the remaining measures. Hypothesized associations between variables were infrequently evaluated. Evidence of data quality, test–retest reliability, responsiveness, interpretation, acceptability and feasibility was also limited. Active patient involvement in PROM development or evaluation was not reported. There was limited evaluation of proxy completions.

Conclusions

The paucity of robust evaluations is disappointing and prevents clear recommendations for PROM-based assessment. Further research must urgently seek to identify which outcomes really matter to this group. Future PROM selection must be underpinned by research which focuses on methodological quality, including issues of acceptability, relevance, feasibility of application, and proxy completion, whilst seeking to actively incorporate the perspective of patients and their advocates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. British Orthopaedic Association. (2007). The care of patients with fragility fracture (Blue book) BOA. http://www.bgs.org.uk/pdf_cms/pubs/.

  2. Johnell, O., & Kanis, J. A. (2004). An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. Osteoporosis International, 15, 897–902.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. National Hip Fracture Database. (2011). NHFD (2010–2011) Annual report. https://data.gov.uk/dataset/national-hip-fracture-database-annual-report-2010-2011.

  4. Ahmad, M. A., Xypnitos, F. N., & Giannoudis, P. V. (2011). Measuring hip outcomes: Common scales and checklists. Injury, 42(3), 259–264.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hutchings, L., Fox, R., & Chesser, T. (2011). Proximal femoral fractures in the elderly: How are we measuring outcome? Injury, 42(11), 1205–1213.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ahmed, S., Berzon, R., Revicki, D. A., et al. (2012). The use of patient reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: Implications for clinical practice and health care policy. Medical Care, 50(12), 1060–1070.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Basch, E., Abernethy, A. P., Mullins, C. D., et al. (2012). Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 30(34), 4229–4255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Basch, E. (2012). Beyond the FDA PRO guidance: Steps toward integrating meaningful patient reported outcomes into regulatory trials and US drug labels. Value in Health, 15, 401–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Barham, L., & Devlin, N. (2011). Patient reported outcome measures: Implications for nursing. Nursing Standard, 25(18), 42–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bryant, D. M., Sanders, D. W., Coles, C. P., Petrisor, B. A., Jeray, K. J., & Laflamme, G. Y. (2009). Selection of outcome measures for patients with hip fracture. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 23(6), 434–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Terwee, C. B., Jansma, E. P., Riphagen, I. I., & de Vet, H. C. (2009). Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 18(8), 1115–1123.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Nilsdotter, A., & Bremander, A. (2011). Measures of hip function and symptoms: Harris hip score (HHS), hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), Oxford hip score (OHS), Lequesne index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip (LISOH), and American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) hip and knee questionnaire. Arthritis Care & Research, 63(S11), S200–S207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Elbers, R. G., Reitberg, M. B., van Wegen, E. E., Verhoef, J., Kramer, S., Terwee, C. B., et al. (2012). Self-report fatigue questionnaires in multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and stroke: A systematic review of measurement properties. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 925–944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Straus, S., Glasziou, M., Richardson, W., & Haynes, R. (2010). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach it (4th ed.). Churchill Livinstone: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., Knol, D. L., Ostelo, R. W., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2012). Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Quality of Life Research, 21(4), 651–657.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Haywood, K. L., Staniszewska, S., & Chapman, S. (2012). Quality and acceptability of patient reported outcome measures in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalitis (CFS/ME): A structured review. Quality of Life Research, 21(2), 35–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2014). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (5th ed.). USA: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. de Vet, H., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. L. (2011). Measurement in medicine. A practical guide. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511996214.

  19. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Haywood, K. L., Collins, S., & Crawley, E. (2014). Assessing severity of illness and outcomes of treatment in children with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalitis (CFS/ME): A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures. Child: Care, Health and Development, 40(6), 806–824.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Staniszewska, S., Haywood, K. L., Brett, J., & Tutton, L. (2012). Patient and public involvement in patient-reported outcome measures: Evolution not revolution. Patient, 5(2), 79–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mattsson, P., Alberts, A., Dahlberg, G., Sohlman, M., Hyldahl, H. C., & Larsson, S. (2005). Resorbable cement for the augmentation of internally-fixed unstable trochanteric fractures. A prospective, randomised multicentre study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 87(9), 1203–1209.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Conijn, A. P., Jens, S., Terwee, C. B., Breek, J. C., & Koelemay, M. J. W. (2015). Assessing the quality of available patient reported outcome measures for intermittent claudication: A systematic review using the COSMIN checklist. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, 49(3), 316–334.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nelson, E., Wasson, J., Kirk, J., Keller, A., Clark, D., Dietrich, A., et al. (1987). Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: description of the COOP Chart method and preliminary findings. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40(Suppl 1), 55S–69S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hunt, S. M., McKenna, S. P., McEwen, J., Backett, E. M., Williams, J., & Papp, E. (1980). A quantitative approach to perceived health status: A validation study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 34(4), 281–286.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Burkhardt, C., & Naderson, K. (2003). The quality of life scale: Reliability, validity and utilisation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales—a users’ manual. Boston: The Health Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ware, J., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-item short-form health survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34(3), 220–233.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. WHOQOL. Group. (1998). WHOQOL manual. Division of mental health and prevention of substance abuse.

  31. Group TE. (1990). EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 16(3), 199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Torrence, G. W., Feeny, D. H., Furlong, W. J., Barr, R. D., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Q. (1996). Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Medical Care, 34, 702–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Feeney, D., Furlong, W., Torrence, G. W., & Goldsmith, C. H. (2002). Multiattribute and single attribute utility functions for Health Utility Index Mark 3 system. Medical Care, 40, 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Brazier, J. E., & Roberts, J. R. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based index from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42(9), 851–859.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Coast, J., Flynn, T. N., Natarajan, L., et al. (2008). Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Social Science and Medicine, 67, 874–882.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Charnley, J. (1972). Long term results of low friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 54, 61–76.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Harris, W. H. (1969). Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation in acetabular fractures treatment by mold arthroplasty. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 51, 737–755.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Carr, A., & Murray, D. (1996). Oxford hip score: Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 78, 185–190.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Silverman, S. L. (2000). The Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire (OPAQ): A reliable and valid disease-targeted measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in osteoporosis. Quality of Life Research, 9, 767–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bellamy, N., Buchanan, W. W., Goldsmith, C. H., Campbell, J., & Stitt, L. (1988). Validation study of the WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically-important patient-relevant outcomes following total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis. The Journal of Orthopaedic Rheumatology, 1, 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Brink, T. L., Yesavage, J. A., Lum, O., Heersema, P., Adey, M. B., & Rose, T. L. (1982). Screening tests for geriatric depression. Clinical Gerontologist, 1, 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hamilton, M. (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 23, 56–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Zung, W. (1965). A self-rating depression scale. Archives of General Psychiatry, 12(1), 63–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Mahoney, F. I., & Barthel, D. W. (1965). Functional evaluation: The Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal, 14, 61–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Baker, N. L., Cook, M. N., Arrighi, H. M., & Bullock, R. (2011). Hip fracture risk and subsequent mortality among Alzheimer’s disease patients in the United Kingdom, 1988–2007. Age and Ageing, 40(1), 49–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pfeiffer, E., Johnson, T. M., & Chiofolo, R. C. (1981). Functional assessment of elderly subjects in four service settings. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 29, 433–437.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Macaulay, W., Nellans, K. W., Garvin, K. L., Iorio, R., Healy, W. L., Rosenwasser, M. P., et al. (2008). Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing hemiarthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures: Winner of the Dorr award. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 23(6), 2–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Jette, A. M., & Cleary, P. D. (1986). Functional disability assessment. Physical Therapy, 67, 1854–1859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lawton, M. P., Moss, M., Fulcomer, M., & Kleban, M. H. (1982). A research and service oriented multilevel assessment instrument. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 91–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Katz, J. N., Phillips, C. B., Poss, R., Harrast, J. J., Fossel, A. H., Liang, M. H., et al. (1995). The validity and reliability of a total hip arthroplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery—American, 77(10), 1528–1534.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Fillenbaum, G. G., & Smyer, M. A. (1981). The development, validity, and reliability of the OARS multidimensional functional assessment questionnaire. Journal of Gerontology, 36(4), 426–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Jones, C. A., & Feeney, D. H. (2005). Agreement between patient and proxy responses of health-related quality of life after hip fracture. Journal of American Geriatrics Society, 53, 1227–1233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Jones, C. A., & Feeny, D. H. (2006). Agreement between patient and proxy responses during recovery after hip fracture: Evidence for the FIM instrument. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87(10), 1382–1387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Parsons, N., Griffin, X. L., Achten, J., & Costa, M. L. (2014). Outcome assessment after hip fracture: Is EQ-5D the answer? Bone & Joint Research, 3(3), 69–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Borgquist, L., Nilsson, L. T., Lindelöw, G., Wiklund, I., & Thorngren, K. G. (1992). Perceived health in hip-fracture patients: A prospective follow-up of 100 patients. Age and Aging, 21(2), 109–116.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Tidermark, J., Zethraeus, N., Svensson, O., Tornkvist, H., & Ponzer, S. (2002). Quality of life related to fracture displacement among elderly patients with femoral neck fractures treated with internal fixation. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 16, 34–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Tidermark, J., Bergstrom, G., Svensson, O., Tornkvist, H., & Ponzer, S. (2003). Responsiveness of the EuroQol (EQ-5D) and SF-36 in elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. Quality of Life Research, 12(8), 1069–1079.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Van Balen, R., Essink-Bot, M. L., Steyerberg, E., Cools, H., & Habbema, D. F. (2003). Quality of life after hip fracture: A comparison of four health status measures in 208 patients. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(10), 507–519.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Inngul, C., Hedbeck, C.-J., Blomfeldt, R., Lapidus, G., Ponzer, S., & Enocson, A. (2013). Unipolar hemiarthroplasty versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures: A four-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial. International Orthopaedics, 37(12), 2457–2464.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Cranney, A. B., Coyle, D., Hopman, W. M., Hum, V., Power, B., & Tugwell, P. S. (2005). Prospective evaluation of preferences and quality of life in women with hip fractures. The Journal of Rheumatology, 32(12), 2393–2399.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Latham, N. K., Mehta, V., Nguyen, A. M., Jette, A. M., Olarsch, S., Papanicolaou, D., et al. (2008). Performance-based or self-report measures of physical function: Which should be used in clinical trials of hip fracture patients? Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 89(11), 2146–2155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Jones, C. A., Pohar, S. L., Feeny, D. H., & Eng, K. (2014). Longitudinal construct validity of the Health Utilities Indices Mark 2 and Mark 3 in hip fracture. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 23(3), 805–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Mendelsohn, M. E., Leidl, D. S., Overend, T. J., & Petrella, R. J. (2003). Specificity of functional mobility measures in older adults after hip fracture: A pilot study. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 82(10), 766–774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Tidermark, J., & Bergström, G. (2007). Responsiveness of the EuroQol (EQ-5D) and the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) in elderly patients with femoral neck fractures. Quality of Life Research, 16(2), 321–330.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hobart, J. C., & Cano, S. J. (2010). Effect sizes can be misleading: Is it time to change the way we measure change? Quality of Life Research, 19, 41.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Griffin, X. L., Parsons, N., Achten, J., Fernandez, M., & Costa, M. L. (2015). Recovery of health-related quality of life in a United Kingdom hip fracture population: The Warwick hip trauma evaluation—a prospective cohort study. The Bone & Joint Journal, 97-B(3), 372–382. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.97B3.35738.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Buecking, B., Struewer, J., Waldermann, A., Horstmann, K., Schubert, N., Balzer-Geldsetzer, M., et al. (2014). What determines health-related quality of life in hip fracture patients at the end of acute care?—a prospective observational study. Osteoporosis International, 25(2), 475–484. doi:10.1007/s00198-013-2415-5. Epub 2013 Jun 20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Mishra, V., Thomas, G., & Sibly, T. F. (2004). Results of displaced subcapital fractures treated by primary total hip replacement. Injury, 35(2), 157–160.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Randell, A. J., Nguyen, T. V., Bhalerao, N., Silverman, S. L., Sambrook, P. N., & Eisman, J. A. (2000). Deterioration in quality of life following hip fracture: A prospective study. Osteoporosis International, 11, 460–466.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Rohde, G., Haugeberg, G., Mengshoel, A. M., Moum, T., & Wahl, A. K. (2010). Two-year changes in quality of life in elderly patients with low-energy hip fractures. A case-control study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 11, 226.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Hall, S. E., Williams, J. A., Senior, J. A., Goldswain, P. R., & Criddle, R. A. (2000). Hip fracture outcomes: Quality of life and functional status in older adults living in the community. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine, 30(3), 327–332.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Shepherd, S. M., & Prescott, R. J. (1996). Use of standardised assessment scales in elderly hip fracture patients. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London, 30(4), 335–343.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Griffiths, F., Mason, V., Boardman, F., Dennick, K., Haywood, K., et al. (2015). Evaluating recovery following hip fracture: A qualitative study of what is important to patients. BMJ Open, 5(1), e005406.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Haywood, K., Brett, J., Salek, S., Marlett, N., Penman, C., Shklarov, S., et al. (2015). Patient and public engagement in health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research: What’s important and why should we care? Quality of Life Research, 24(5), 1069–1076.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Seitz, D. P., Adunuri, N., Gill, S. S., & Rochon, P. A. (2011). Prevalence of dementia and cognitive impairment among older adults with hip fractures. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 12, 556–564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Allan, L. M., Ballard, C. G., Rowan, E. N., & Kenny, R. A. (2009). Incidence and prediction of falls in dementia: A prospective study in older people. PLoS One, 4(5), e5521.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Jones, C. A., & Feeny, D. H. (2006). Agreement between patient and proxy responses during recovery after hip fracture: Evidence for the FIM Instrument. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87, 1382–1387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., & Jones, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England) 2(14).

  79. Binder, E. F., Brown, M., & Sinacore, D. R. (2004). Effects of extended outpatient rehabilitation after hip fracture a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 292(7), 837–846.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Pusic, A. L., Chen, C. M., Cano, S., Klassen, A., McCarthy, C., Collins, E. D., et al. (2007). Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: A systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 120(4), 823–837.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Garratt, A., Schmidt, L., Mackintosh, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2002). Quality of life measurement: Bibliography study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ, 324(7351), 1417.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/…/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf.

  83. Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312(7023), 71–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Boonen, S., Autier, P., Barette, M., Vanderschueren, D., Lips, P., & Haentjens, P. (2004). Functional outcome and quality of life following hip fracture in elderly women: A prospective controlled study. Osteoporosis International, 15, 87–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Haywood, K. L., Griffin, X. L., Achten, J., & Costa, M. L. (2014). Developing a care outcome set for hip fracture trials. The Bone & Joint Journal, 96-B(8), 1016–1023.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Connell, J., O’Cathain, A., & Brazier, J. (2014). Measuring quality of life in mental health: Are we asking the right questions? Social Science and Medicine, 120, 12–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Duppils, G. S., & Wikblad, K. (2004). Cognitive function and health-related quality of life after delirium in connection with hip surgery: A six-month follow-up. Orthopaedic Nursing, 23(3), 195–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the Royal College of Nursing Research Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, Warwick University, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK

    K. L. Haywood, E. Tutton & S. Staniszewska

  2. AHPD, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Jack Straw’s Lane, Marston, Oxford, OX3 OFL, UK

    J. Brett

  3. Trauma Research, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Kadoorie Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK

    E. Tutton

Authors
  1. K. L. Haywood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Brett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Tutton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Staniszewska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. L. Haywood.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors Kirstie L Haywood, Jo Brett, Liz Tutton and Sophie Staniszewska declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haywood, K.L., Brett, J., Tutton, E. et al. Patient-reported outcome measures in older people with hip fracture: a systematic review of quality and acceptability. Qual Life Res 26, 799–812 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1424-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-016-1424-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation