Cognitive Outcomes After Hip Fracture Surgery: The Association of Postoperative Delirium on Previously Cognitively Normal Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Delirium, an acute disorder of attention and cognition, is a preventable contributor to poor outcomes in older adults including future cognitive decline. The goal of this study was to examine the cognitive impact of postoperative delirium. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: A secondary analysis of the randomized clinical trial STRIDE (A Strategy to Reduce the Incidence of Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients) which included two hundred hip fracture repair patients was conducted. MEASUREMENTS: Cognitive changes one year after surgery were examined. Modified Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and postoperative delirium status were adjudicated by a consensus panel. Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98(DRS-R-98) was used to measure delirium severity. Data were analyzed using a random-intercept linear spline model, with Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and dementia severity (using CDR Sum of Boxes [CDR-SB]), as outcomes. RESULTS: 36.5% of the overall cohort experienced delirium. When stratified by baseline cognitive status, delirium was associated with a faster rate of decline in MMSE and worsening in CDR-SB in cognitively unimpaired participants, but not in participants with baseline cognitive impairment. We found an estimated delirium associated change in MMSE of 1.52 points and CDR-SB of 1.22 points within one year after surgery associated with postoperative delirium after hip fracture repair in cognitively normal participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that postoperative delirium is associated with a faster rate of cognitive decline, particularly in cognitively unimpaired individuals. This work highlights the importance of delirium prevention and management strategies in improving long-term cognitive outcomes in older adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".