Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Worldwide research tendency and hotspots on hip fracture: a 20-year bibliometric analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Osteoporosis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Summary

We analyzed the overall knowledge structure, development trends, and research hotspots of 7684 publications related to hip fracture through the bibliometric method. Our results indicate this area has received more and more attention from researchers. Prevention of complications will be the focus of future studies.

Introduction

Hip fracture is an international public health problem, with high morbidity, mortality, and associated health care costs. Research on hip fracture has been developed rapidly in recent years, but no bibliometric studies have been performed. We aimed to identify the publication changes in scientific output relating to hip fracture over the past two decades.

Methods

The scientific output relating to hip fracture from 2000 to 2019 was identified and selected from the Web of Science Core Collection. Excel 2019 was used to summarize the quantitative indicators including publication number, citations, H-index, journal’s impact factors, and journal citation reports. VOS viewer and CiteSpace software tools were used for co-authorship, citation, co-citation, and co-occurrence analyses between countries, institutions, journals, authors, references, and keywords. Data were analyzed on November 13, 2020.

Results

A total of 7684 publications were extracted. The USA was the leading contributor in this field with the largest publications (1876, 24.41%), the most citations (75,423 times), and the highest H-index (124). The number of publications in the Western European region is 1.82 times higher than that of North America region, and 3.59 times that of Eastern Asia region. The most productive institutions on hip fracture were University of Maryland (160). Injury (506) had the highest number of publications, while Osteoporosis International (20,483 times) was the most co-cited journal. Magaziner J and Parker MJ were the key researchers. The keywords were stratified into five clusters: cluster 1 (“operative approaches study”), cluster 2 (“rehabilitation study”), cluster 3 (“osteoporosis study”), cluster 4 (“outcomes and complications study”), and cluster 5 (“epidemiology study”). For hotspots, “tranexamic acid” showed a relatively latest average appearing years of 2017.52, followed by “30-day-mortality,” “readmission,” and “length of stay.”

Conclusions

There will be an increasing number of publications on the hip fracture research based on the current global trends, and the USA stays ahead in this field. In terms of region, Western Europe had the greater impact than North America. It is recommended to pay attention to the promising hotspots, such as tranexamic acid, 30-day-mortality, readmission, and length of stay.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kern LM, Powe NR, Levine MA, Fitzpatrick AL, Harris TB, Robbins J, Fried LP (2005) Association between screening for osteoporosis and the incidence of hip fracture. Ann Intern Med 142(3):173–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Braithwaite RS, Col NF, Wong JB (2003) Estimating hip fracture morbidity, mortality and costs. J Am Geriatr Soc 51(3):364–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooper C, Cole ZA, Holroyd CR et al (2011) Secular trends in the incidence of hip and other osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 22(5):1277–1288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Veronese N, Maggi S (2018) Epidemiology and social costs of hip fracture. Injury. 49(8):1458–1460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bhandari M, Swiontkowski M (2017) Management of acute hip fracture. N Engl J Med 377(21):2053–2062

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Handoll HH, Parker MJ (2008) Conservative versus operative treatment for hip fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (3):CD000337

  7. Brin YS, Palmanovich E, Aliev E, Laver L, Yaacobi E, Nyska M, Kish BJ (2014) Closed reduction and internal fixation for intertrochanteric femoral fractures is safer and more efficient using two fluoroscopes simultaneously. Injury. 45(7):1071–1075

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Florschutz AV, Langford JR, Haidukewych GJ, Koval KJ (2015) Femoral neck fractures: current management. J Orthop Trauma 29(3):121–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gjertsen JE (2019) Should total hip arthroplasty be used for hip fracture? N Engl J Med 381(23):2261–2262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahrengart L, Törnkvist H, Fornander P et al (2002) A randomized study of the compression hip screw and gamma nail in 426 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 401:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pincus D, Ravi B, Wasserstein D, Huang A, Paterson JM, Nathens AB, Kreder HJ, Jenkinson RJ, Wodchis WP (2017) Association between wait time and 30-day mortality in adults undergoing hip fracture surgery. JAMA. 318(20):1994–2003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Chechik O, Thein R, Fichman G, Haim A, Tov TB, Steinberg EL (2011) The effect of clopidogrel and aspirin on blood loss in hip fracture surgery. Injury. 42(11):1277–1282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Berggren M, Karlsson Å, Lindelöf N, Englund U, Olofsson B, Nordström P, Gustafson Y, Stenvall M (2019) Effects of geriatric interdisciplinary home rehabilitation on complications and readmissions after hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 33(1):64–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gao Y, Shi S, Ma W, Chen J, Cai Y, Ge L, Li L, Wu J, Tian J (2019) Bibliometric analysis of global research on PD-1 and PD-L1 in the field of cancer. Int Immunopharmacol 72:374–384

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Synnestvedt MB, Chen C, Holmes JH (2005) CiteSpace II: visualization and knowledge discovery in bibliographic databases. AMIA Annu Symp Proc:724–728

  16. van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 84:523–538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ghafouri HB, Mohammadhassanzadeh H, Shokraneh F, Vakilian M, Farahmand S (2014) Social network analysis of Iranian researchers on emergency medicine: a sociogram analysis. Emerg Med J 31(8):619–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Huang T, Wu H, Yang S, Su B, Tang K, Quan Z, Zhong W, Luo X (2020) Global trends of researches on sacral fracture surgery: a bibliometric study based on VOSviewer. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 45(12):E721–E728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tao L, Zhou S, Tao Z, Wen K, da W, Meng Y, Zhu Y (2020) The publication trends and hot spots of scoliosis research from 2009 to 2018: a 10-year bibliometric analysis. Ann Transl Med 8:365

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang K, Xing D, Dong S, Lin J (2019) The global state of research in nonsurgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a bibliometric and visualized study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 20:407

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Biglu MH, Ghavami M, Biglu S (2014) Authorship, institutional and citation metrics for publications on postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 25(4):1337–1343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhai X, Cui J, Shao J (2017) Global research trends in spinal ultrasound: a systematic bibliometric analysis. BMJ Open 7(10):e015317

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Engqvist L, Frommen JG (2008) The h-index and self-citations. Trends Ecol Evol 23(5):250–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen Z, Yu J, Song Y, Chui D (2010) Aging Beijing: challenges and strategies of health care for the elderly. Ageing Res Rev 9(Suppl 1):S2–S5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Parker MJ, Khan RJ, Crawford J, Pryor GA (2002) Hemiarthroplasty versus internal fixation for displaced intracapsular hip fractures in the elderly. A randomised trial of 455 patients. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 84(8):1150–1155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Haentjens P, Magaziner J, Colón-Emeric CS et al (2010) Meta-analysis: excess mortality after hip fracture among older women and men. Ann Intern Med 152(6):380–390

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Cummings SR, Melton LJ (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet. 359(9319):1761–1767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Beshyah WS, Beshyah SA (2019) Bibliometric analysis of the literature on Ramadan fasting and diabetes in the past three decades (1989-2018). Diabetes Res Clin Pract 151:313–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cree M, Soskolne CL, Belseck E, Hornig J, McElhaney JE, Brant R, Suarez-Almazor M (2000) Mortality and institutionalization following hip fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc 48(3):283–288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Binder EF, Brown M, Sinacore DR (2004) Effects of extended outpatient rehabilitation after hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 292(7):837–846

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Orosz GM, Magaziner J, Hannan EL (2004) Association of timing of surgery for hip fracture and patient outcomes. JAMA. 291(14):1738–1743

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A (2008) FRAX and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK. Osteoporos Int 19(4):385–397

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Uzoigwe CE, Burnand HG, Cheesman CL et al (2013) Early and ultra-early surgery in hip fracture patients improves survival. Injury. 44(6):726–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hongisto MT, Nuotio MS, Luukkaala T (2019) Delay to surgery of less than 12 hours is associated with improved short- and long-term survival in moderate- to high-risk hip fracture patients. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 10:2151459319853142

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang X, Guo J, Gu D, Yang Y, Yang X, Zhu K (2019) Tracking knowledge evolution, hotspots and future directions of emerging technologies in cancers research: a bibliometrics review. J Cancer 10(12):2643–2653

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Chudyk AM, Jutai JW, Petrella RJ, Speechley M (2009) Systematic review of hip fracture rehabilitation practices in the elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 90(2):246–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Magaziner J, Mangione KK, Orwig D, Baumgarten M, Magder L, Terrin M, Fortinsky RH, Gruber-Baldini AL, Beamer BA, Tosteson ANA, Kenny AM, Shardell M, Binder EF, Koval K, Resnick B, Miller R, Forman S, McBride R, Craik RL (2019) Effect of a multicomponent home-based physical therapy intervention on ambulation after hip fracture in older adults: the CAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 322(10):946–956

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Johansson H, Kanis JA, Oden A, Johnell O, McCloskey E (2009) BMD, clinical risk factors and their combination for hip fracture prevention. Osteoporos Int 20(10):1675–1682

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Johnell O, Kanis JA, Oden A, Johansson H, de Laet C, Delmas P, Eisman JA, Fujiwara S, Kroger H, Mellstrom D, Meunier PJ, Melton LJ III, O'Neill T, Pols H, Reeve J, Silman A, Tenenhouse A (2005) Predictive value of BMD for hip and other fractures. J Bone Miner Res 20(7):1185–1194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fukui N, Watanabe Y, Nakano T, Sawaguchi T, Matsushita T (2012) Predictors for ambulatory ability and the change in ADL after hip fracture in patients with different levels of mobility before injury: a 1-year prospective cohort study. J Orthop Trauma 26(3):163–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hopley C, Stengel D, Ekkernkamp A, Wich M (2010) Primary total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older patients: systematic review. BMJ. 340:c2332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Maggi S, Siviero P, Wetle T et al (2010) A multicenter survey on profile of care for hip fracture: predictors of mortality and disability. Osteoporos Int 21(2):223–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Tay YW, Hong CC, Murphy D (2014) Functional outcome and mortality in nonagenarians following hip fracture surgery. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134(6):765–772

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Roche JJ, Wenn RT, Sahota O, Moran CG (2005) Effect of comorbidities and postoperative complications on mortality after hip fracture in elderly people: prospective observational cohort study. BMJ. 331(7529):1374

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Kanis JA, Odén A, McCloskey EV et al (2012) A systematic review of hip fracture incidence and probability of fracture worldwide. Osteoporos Int 23(9):2239–2256

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Zufferey PJ, Miquet M, Quenet S, Martin P, Adam P, Albaladejo P, Mismetti P, Molliex S, Tranexamic acid in hip-fracture surgery (THIF) study (2010) Tranexamic acid in hip fracture surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth 104(1):23–30

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Lee TC, Ho PS, Lin HT, Ho ML, Huang HT, Chang JK (2017) One-year readmission risk and mortality after hip fracture surgery: a national population-based study in Taiwan. Aging Dis 8(4):402–409

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Zhou Yan for the help in language polishing.

Funding

This work was supported by the Tianjin Municipal Health Bureau (grant number 14KG115) and the Key Projects of Tianjin Natural Science Foundation (grant number 20JCZDJC00730).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Haiyang Wu and Yuqiao Li contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical College of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Neurorehabilitation, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China

    Haiyang Wu, Yuqiao Li, Linjian Tong, Yulin Wang & Zhiming Sun

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tianjin Huanhu Hospital, No. 6, Jizhao Road, Jinnan District, Tianjin, 300350, China

    Zhiming Sun

Authors
  1. Haiyang Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuqiao Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Linjian Tong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yulin Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhiming Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiming Sun.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(PDF 95 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 289 kb)

ESM 3

(PDF 863 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, H., Li, Y., Tong, L. et al. Worldwide research tendency and hotspots on hip fracture: a 20-year bibliometric analysis. Arch Osteoporos 16, 73 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-00929-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-00929-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation