Predictors of Long-Term Pain After Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Femoral Neck Fractures: A Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with the development of prolonged pain after hip fracture surgery. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Eighty hospitals in 10 countries. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One thousand four hundred forty-one hip fracture patients in the HEALTH trial. INTERVENTIONS: Total hip arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Moderate-to-severe pain (at least 2 activities on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis questionnaire pain subscale with scores ≥2) at 12 and 24 months after hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: Of 840 and 726 patients with complete baseline data and outcomes at 1-year and 2-year follow-up, 96 (11.4%) and 80 (11.0%) reported moderate-to-severe pain, respectively. An increased risk of pain at both 1 and 2 years after surgery was associated with reporting moderate-to-severe hip pain before fracture [absolute risk increase (ARI) 15.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.44%-24.35%; ARI 12.5%, 95% CI 2.85%-22.12%, respectively] and prefracture opioid use (ARI 15.6%, 95% CI 5.41%-25.89%; ARI 21.1%; 95% CI 8.23%-34.02%, respectively). Female sex was associated with an increased risk of persistent pain at 1 year (ARI 6.2%, 95% CI 3.53%-8.84%). A greater risk of persistent pain at 2 years was associated with younger age (≤79-year-old; ARI 6.3%; 95% CI 2.67%-9.91%) and higher prefacture functional status (ARI 10.7%; 95% CI 3.80%-17.64%). CONCLUSIONS: Among hip fracture patients undergoing arthroplasty, approximately one in 10 will experience moderate-to-severe pain up to 2 years after surgery. Younger age, female sex, higher functioning prefracture, living with hip pain prefracture, and use of prescription opioids were predictive of persistent pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".