Stressors and coping strategies in older people hospitalised for hip surgery following a fall: a multiple case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: More than half of older persons admitted to an emergency department after a fall have a hip fracture and require surgery for a total hip replacement. This procedure has a high risk of postoperative complications and consequences for older persons, their informal caregivers, and the healthcare system. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of older persons, their informal caregivers and health professionals about intra-personal, inter-personal and extra-personal stressors arising from hip surgery following the fall of an older person hospitalised in orthopaedics, as well as the coping strategies used and the results obtained. METHODS: A qualitative multiple case study. The sample consisted of eight cases. Each case consisted of one older person, their informal caregiver and the professionals involved in their care: a nurse, an orthopaedic surgeon and a physiotherapist. A total of 32 participants were recruited. Data were collected between August 2018 and February 2019 in a public hospital in French-speaking Switzerland. Intra- and inter-case analyses were performed. RESULTS: Five topics emerged: two concerning stressors for older persons (the physical and psychological consequences of the fall and hospitalisation; the loss of relational and environmental markers and habits); two relating to the coping strategies used to face the stressors (being resilient and involved in their own care; partially meeting the older person's needs); and one regarding the results of the strategies used (reassurance through consideration of some of their needs). CONCLUSIONS: Older persons hospitalised for hip surgery after a fall are confronted with various intra-, inter- and extra-personal stressors and have to explore, together with their informal caregivers, strategies to cope with the consequences of these stressors. Healthcare professionals should possess efficient intervention strategies to help identify and support older persons who experience various types of stressors during hospitalisation for hip surgery following a fall.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".