Search

Background:. Multiple studies have compared different pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis agents after hip fracture surgery, including aspirin, unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), and warfarin, resulting in variability in clinical practice. To guide clinical management, a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), which enables the simultaneous assessment of the effects of multiple interventions for the same patient population, was performed. This study aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis in reducing venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with surgically treated hip fractures. Methods:. The primary outcome was the effect of the treatment on the VTE rate, and the secondary outcome was the treatment effect on the bleeding rate. Relevant studies were identified by a systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from January 2000 to February 2022. Title, abstract, and full-text screening; data extraction; and risk-of-bias assessment were performed. All studies examining thromboprophylaxis interventions (DOAC, LMWH, UFH, aspirin, and warfarin) in patients with a surgically treated hip fracture were included. Bayesian NMA was performed, and dichotomous outcome data were pooled using the odds ratio. Interventions were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for each outcome. Results:. A total of 19 studies were included after the screening of 466 citations and 77 full-text articles. Of the included studies, 15 studies had a high overall risk of bias. The NMA of the VTE outcome included 19 studies, 49,409 participants, and 6 thromboprophylaxis interventions. The NMA of the bleeding outcome included 3 studies, 18,163 participants, and 3 interventions. The mean age ranged from 43.5 to 86.2 years among the included studies. No thromboprophylaxis intervention was statistically different from any other intervention in its effect on the VTE or bleeding rate in hip fracture patients. Conclusions:. This NMA demonstrated that there was no difference between the thromboprophylaxis interventions in reducing VTE or bleeding rates in hip fracture patients. More robust randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the most effective thromboprophylaxis interventions for patients with hip fractures. Level of Evidence:. Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in younger patients is projected to increase by a factor of 5 by 2030 and will have important implications for clinical practice, policymaking, and research. This scoping review aimed to synthesize and summarize THA implants' survival, reoperation, and wear rates and identify indications and risk factors for reoperation following THA in patients ≤55 years old. Material and methods: Standardized scoping review methodology was applied. We searched 4 electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) from January 1990 to May 2019. Selection criteria were patients aged ≤55 years, THA survival, reoperation, and/or wear rate reported, a minimum of 20 reoperations included, and minimum level III based on the Oxford Level of Evidence. Two authors independently reviewed the citations, extracted data, and assessed quality. Results: Of the 2255 citations screened, 35 retrospective cohort studies were included. Survival rates for THA at 5 and 20 years were 90%-100% and 60.4%-77.7%, respectively. Reoperation rates at ≤5-year post THA ranged from 1.6% to 5.4% and increased at 10-20 years post THA (8.2%-67%). Common causes for reoperation were aseptic loosening of hip implants, osteolysis, wear, and infection. Higher reoperation and lower survival rates were seen with hip dysplasia and avascular necrosis than with other primary diagnoses. Conclusions: Over time, THA prosthetic survival rates decreased, and reoperation increased in patients ≤55 years. Aseptic loosening of hip implants, osteolysis, wear, and infection were the most frequent reasons for the reoperation.

PurposeThe World Health Organization (WHO) declared severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a pandemic in March 2020, causing almost 3.5 million coronavirus disease (COVID-19) related deaths worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a significant burden on healthcare systems, economies, and social systems in many countries around the world. The access and delivery of rehabilitation care were severely disrupted, and patients have faced several challenges during the COVID-19 outbreak. These challenges include addressing new functional impairments faced by survivors of COVID-19 and infection prevention to avoid the virus spread to healthcare workers and other patients not infected with COVID-19. In this scoping review, we aim to develop rehabilitation recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic across the continuum of rehabilitation care.Materials and MethodsEstablished frameworks were used to guide the scoping review methodology. Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL databases from inception to August 1, 2020, and prominent rehabilitation organizations’ websites were searched.Study SelectionWe included articles and reports if they were focused on rehabilitation recommendations for COVID-19 survivors or the general population at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.Data ExtractionTwo of our team members used the pre-tested data extraction form to extract data from included full-text articles. The strength and the quality of the extracted recommendations were evaluated by two reviewers using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.ResultsWe retrieved 6,468 citations, of which 2,086 were eligible after removing duplicates. We excluded 1,980 citations based on the title and the abstract. Of the screened full-text articles, we included 106 studies. We present recommendations based on the patient journey at the time of the pandemic. We assessed the evidence to be of overall fair quality and strong for the recommendations.ConclusionWe have combined the latest research results and accumulated expert opinions on rehabilitation to develop acute and post-acute rehabilitation recommendations in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Further updates are warranted in order to incorporate the emerging evidence into rehabilitation guidelines.

Purpose: The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2 has imposed a significant burden on health care systems, economies, and social systems in many countries around the world. The provision of rehabilitation services for persons with active COVID-19 infection poses challenges to maintaining a safe environment for patients and treating providers.Materials and Methods: Established frameworks were used to guide the scoping review methodology. Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL databases from inception to August 1, 2020, and prominent rehabilitation organizations’ websites were searched.Study Selection: We included articles and reports if they were focused on rehabilitation related recommendations for COVID-19 patients, treating providers, or the general population.Data Extraction: Pairs of team members used a pre-tested data abstraction form to extract data from included full-text articles. The strength and the quality of the extracted recommendations were evaluated by two reviewers using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results: We retrieved 6,468 citations, of which 2,086 were eligible for review, after duplicates were removed. We excluded 1,980 citations based on title and abstract screening. Of the screened full-text articles, we included all 106 studies. A summary of recommendations is presented. We assessed the overall evidence to be strong and of fair quality.Conclusion: The rehabilitation setting, and processes, logistics, and patient and healthcare provider precaution recommendations identified aim to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and ensure adequate and safe rehabilitation services, whether face-to-face or through teleservices. The COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly changing. Further updates will be needed over time in order to incorporate emerging best evidence into rehabilitation guidelines.

The purpose of this study is to examine the feasibility, safety and outcomes of a study comparing a 6-week post-operative rehabilitation program to usual care in patients ≤60 years undergoing elective unilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: A cohort of 24 THA patients were recruited during their 6-week postoperative visit to their surgeons. The community-based rehabilitation program, which was designed to improve function and increase activity, consisted of 12 structured exercise classes on land and water over 6 weeks. Physical activity was assessed using a Sense Wear Pro Armband (SWA). Participants completed the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and THA satisfaction questionnaire before and immediately after the intervention. Results: 14 participants received the augmented rehabilitation, and 10 participants were in the control group. All except one in the intervention group completed at least 80% of the sessions. The intervention group took significantly more steps/day (mean difference = 2440 steps/day, 95% CI = 1678, 4712) (p < 0.05), at the follow-up compared to baseline. The intervention group had a higher mean change of number of weekly PA bouts than the control group. Within the intervention group, all HOOS subscales were significantly higher at the follow-up compared to baseline. Conclusion: Findings provided pragmatic insight regarding the intervention and assessments of implementing an augmented rehabilitation program for elective THA.

Abstract Background Frail older adults living in long term care (LTC) homes have a high fracture risk, which can result in reduced quality of life, pain and death. The Fracture Risk Scale (FRS) was designed for fracture risk assessment in LTC, to optimize targeting of services in those at highest risk. This study aims to examine the construct validity and discriminative properties of the FRS in three Canadian provinces at 1-year follow up. Methods LTC residents were included if they were: 1) Adults admitted to LTC homes in Ontario (ON), British Columbia (BC) and Manitoba (MB) Canada; and 2) Received a Resident Assessment Instrument Minimum Data Set Version 2.0. After admission to LTC, one-year hip fracture risk was evaluated for all the included residents using the FRS (an eight-level risk scale, level 8 represents the highest fracture risk). Multiple logistic regressions were used to determine the differences in incident hip or all clinical fractures across the provinces and FRS risk levels. We examined the differences in incident hip or all clinical fracture for each FRS level across the three provinces (adjusted for age, BMI, gender, fallers and previous fractures). We used the C-statistic to assess the discriminative properties of the FRS for each province. Results Descriptive statistics on the LTC populations in ON (n = 29,848), BC (n = 3129), and MB (n = 2293) are: mean (SD) age 82 (10), 83 (10), and 84 (9), gender (female %) 66, 64, and 70% respectively. The incident hip fractures and all clinical fractures for FRS risk level were similar among the three provinces and ranged from 0.5 to 19.2% and 1 to 19.2% respectively. The overall discriminative properties of the FRS were similar between ON (C-statistic = 0.673), BC (C-statistic = 0.644) and MB (C-statistic = 0.649) samples. Conclusion FRS is a valid tool for identifying LTC residents at different risk levels for hip or all clinical fractures in three provinces. Having a fracture risk assessment tool that is tailored to the LTC context and embedded within the routine clinical assessment may have significant implications for policy, service delivery and care planning, and may improve care for LTC residents across Canada.

Abstract Background Joint replacement provides significant improvements in pain, physical function, and quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis. With a growing body of evidence indicating that frailty can be treated, it is important to determine whether targeting frailty reduction in hip and knee replacement patients improves post-operative outcomes. Objectives The primary objective is to examine the feasibility of a parallel group RCT comparing a preoperative multi-modal frailty intervention to usual care in pre-frail/frail older adults undergoing elective unilateral hip or knee replacements. The secondary objectives are1.To explore potential efficacy of the multi-modal frailty intervention in improving frailty and mobility between baseline and 6 weeks post-surgery using Fried frailty phenotype and short performance physical battery (SPPB) respectively.2.To explore potential efficacy of the multi-modal frailty intervention on post-operative healthcare services use. Methods/Design In a parallel group pilot RCT, participants will be recruited from the Regional Joint Assessment Program in Hamilton, Canada. Participants who are (1) ≥ 60 years old; (2) pre-frail (score of 1 or 2) or frail (score of 3–5; Fried frailty phenotype); (3) having elective unilateral hip or knee replacement; and (4) having surgery wait times between 3 and 10 months will be recruited and randomized to either the intervention or usual care group. The multi-modal frailty intervention components will include (1) tailored exercise program (center-based and/or home-based) with education and cognitive behavioral change strategies; (2) protein supplementation; (3) vitamin D supplementation; and (4) medication review. The main comparative analysis will take place at 6 weeks post-operative. The outcome assessors, data entry personnel, and data analysts are blinded to treatment allocation. Assessments: feasibility will be assessed by recruitment rate, retention rate, and data collection completion. Frailty and healthcare use and other clinical outcomes will be assessed. The study outcomes will be collected at the baseline, 1 week pre-operative, and 6 weeks and 6 months post-operative. Discussion This is the first study to examine the feasibility of multi-modal frailty intervention in pre-frail/frail older adults undergoing hip or knee replacement. This study will inform the planning and designing of multi-modal frailty interventional studies in hip and knee replacement patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02885337

Abstract Background Frailty is a common syndrome affecting 5–17% of community-dwelling older adults. Various interventions are used to prevent or treat frailty. Given the diversity of singular and multi-faceted frailty interventions, not all of them have been compared in head-to-head studies. Network meta-analyses provide an approach to simultaneous consideration of the relative effectiveness of multiple treatment alternatives. This systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs aims to determine the comparative effect of interventions targeting the prevention or treatment of frailty. Method We will identify relevant RCTs, in any language and publication date, by a systematic search of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), HealthSTAR, DARE, PsychINFO, PEDro, SCOPUS, and Scielo. Duplicate title and abstract and full-text screening will be performed. Authors will extract data and assess risk of bias (using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool) of eligible studies. The review interventions will include (1) physical activity only, (2) physical activity with protein supplementation or other nutritional supplementation, (3) psychosocial intervention, (4) medication management, (5) pharmacotherapy, and (6) multi-faceted intervention (defined as an intervention that combine physical activity and/or nutrition with any of the following: (1) psychosocial intervention, (2) medication management, and (3) pharmacotherapy). Our primary outcome is difference in change of physical frailty from baseline measured by a reliable and valid frailty measure. Secondary outcomes and the assessments are (1) cognition, (2) short physical performance battery, (3) any other physical performance measure, (4) treatment cost, (5) quality of life, and (6) any adverse outcome. We will conduct a network meta-analysis using a Bayesian hierarchical model. We will also estimate the ranking probabilities for all treatments at each possible rank for each intervention and will assess the certainty of the estimates of effect using GRADE approach. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review and network meta-analysis considering the direct and indirect effect of interventions targeting frailty prevention or treatment. Given the established high prevalence and socio-economic burden of frailty, there is an urgent need for a high-quality systematic review to inform evidence-based management of frailty. Systematic review registration PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016037465 .