Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background People with cognitive impairment and dementia have a poor outcome after a hip fracture surgery, about 30-50% of all those who sustain a hip fracture have dementia. Therefore the aim was to investigate whether a multidisciplinary postoperative intervention program could reduce postoperative complications and improve functional recovery among people with dementia. Methods A randomized controlled trial with subgroup analyses among patients with dementia. Sixty-four patients with femoral neck fracture, aged ≥70 years at Umeå University Hospital, Sweden. The intervention consisted of staff education, individualized care planning and rehabilitation, active prevention, detection and treatment of postoperative complications, especially delirium. The staff worked in teams to apply comprehensive geriatric assessment, management and rehabilitation, including a follow-up at 4 months postoperatively. The control group followed conventional postoperative routines. Results There were fewer postoperative complications in the intervention group such as urinary tract infections, p=0.001; nutritional problems, p=0.025; postoperative delirium, p=0.002; falls, p=0.006. At 4 months a larger proportion in the intervention group had regained their previous independent indoor walking ability performance, p=0.005. At 12 months a larger proportion in the intervention group had regained the activities of daily living (ADL) performance level they had before the fracture, p=0.027. Conclusion This study demonstrates that patients with dementia who suffer a hip fracture can benefit from multidisciplinary geriatric assessment and rehabilitation and should not be excluded from rehabilitation programs.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 64/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 37 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 64 of 100. Total 64 of 100.37 of the 58 points we could judge = 64 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of gerontology and geriatrics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21930310)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 37 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100.
Total 64 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Stenvall, M., Berggren, M., Lundström, M., Gustafson, Y., & Olofsson, B. (2012). A multidisciplinary intervention program improved the outcome after hip fracture for people with dementia--subgroup analyses of a randomized controlled trial. Archives of gerontology and geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2011.08.013

Vancouver

Stenvall M, Berggren M, Lundström M, Gustafson Y, Olofsson B. A multidisciplinary intervention program improved the outcome after hip fracture for people with dementia--subgroup analyses of a randomized controlled trial. Archives of gerontology and geriatrics. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2011.08.013. PMID: 21930310.

BibTeX

@article{stenvall2012-21930310,
  author  = {Stenvall, M. and Berggren, M. and Lundström, M. and Gustafson, Y. and Olofsson, B.},
  title   = {{A multidisciplinary intervention program improved the outcome after hip fracture for people with dementia--subgroup analyses of a randomized controlled trial}},
  journal = {Archives of gerontology and geriatrics},
  year    = {2012},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.archger.2011.08.013},
  pmid    = {21930310},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2011.08.013}
}

Related studies in Clinical safety

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →