Interdisciplinary inpatient care for elderly people with hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hip fractures in elderly people are associated with impaired function and ambulation and high rates of death and admission to institutions. Interventions designed to improve the outcomes of hip fracture (e.g., mobility and discharge to own home) that have incorporated interdisciplinary care have had mixed results. We compared the effectiveness of postoperative interdisciplinary care with that of usual care for elderly patients with hip fracture. METHODS: The study population consisted of 279 patients at least 70 years of age from the community and from nursing homes who underwent surgical repair of hip fracture at a university-affiliated acute care hospital. The subjects were randomly assigned to receive postoperative interdisciplinary care (n = 141) or usual care (n = 138) during their hospital stay. Interdisciplinary care included routine assessment and care by an internist-geriatrician, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, social worker and clinical nurse specialist, as well as twice-weekly interdisciplinary rounds to set goals for the patients and to monitor their progress. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients alive with no decline in ambulation or transfers in and out of a chair or bed and no change in place of residence at 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: At 6 months, 56 patients (39.7%) in the interdisciplinary care group and 47 (34.1%) in the usual care group were alive and had no decline from baseline in terms of ambulation, chair and bed transfers or place of residence (difference 5.6%, 95% confidence interval -5.6% to 17.0%). Multiple logistic regression analysis with adjustment for baseline factors showed no significant difference between treatment groups for the primary outcome measure at 3 months (p = 0.44) or at 6 months (p = 0.67). The initial length of stay in hospital was longer for patients receiving interdisciplinary care: 29.2 (standard deviation [SD] 22.6) v. 20.9 (SD 18.8) days (p < 0.001). However, the mean number of days spent in an institution (including hospital, inpatient rehabilitation and nursing home) over the 6-month follow-up period was similar in the 2 groups (p = 0.84). A subgroup analysis suggested a trend to benefit from interdisciplinary care in patients with mild to moderate cognitive impairment. INTERPRETATION: Postoperative inpatient interdisciplinary care did not result in significantly better 3- or 6-month outcomes in elderly patients with hip fracture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".