Medical and social consequences of osteoporotic proximal femoral fracture in residents of Yekaterinburg

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The most severe complication of osteoporosis is a fracture of the proximal femur. High mortality, disability, and economic costs determine the significance of fractures at this site for healthcare. Repeat fractures following a proximal femoral fracture, associated with low levels of osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment, play a significant role in adverse outcomes.

AIM: To assess the medical and social consequences of osteoporotic proximal femoral fractures and the frequency of secondary fractures, as well as the rate of osteoporosis detection and treatment in individuals at high risk of fractures, in order to inform subsequent changes in healthcare delivery approaches for this patient category.

METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients aged 50 years and older, hospitalized at the Traumatology Department of Yekaterinburg Central City Clinical Hospital No. 23 during 2021 with a diagnosis of “proximal femoral fracture.” The study was performed in two stages. The first stage involved assessing surgical activity and in-hospital mortality in patients with osteoporotic proximal femoral fractures over a 12-month period. The second stage consisted of assessing the medical and social consequences, the detection and treatment of osteoporosis, and the frequency of repeat osteoporotic fractures one year after the proximal femoral fracture.

RESULTS: The study included 514 patients with osteoporotic proximal femoral fractures. Of these, 72 (14%) individuals were transferred to hospitals repurposed for the treatment of the novel coronavirus infection. Surgical treatment was performed on 396 (89.6%) patients: arthroplasty — 157 (39.6%), osteosynthesis — 239 (60.4%). One year after the proximal femoral fracture, 351 (75.3%) were alive, and 115 (24.7%) had died. Medical and social consequences of the proximal femoral fracture were known for 178 individuals. Of these, 5.6% of patients remained immobilized, 53.4% had their activity limited to their apartment, and 41% had resumed an active lifestyle. Repeat fractures within one year occurred in 15.7% of patients. Only 10 (5.6%) individuals were taking anti-osteoporotic medication.

CONCLUSION: The assessment of medical care for osteoporotic proximal femoral fractures showed satisfactory surgical activity, which led to a reduction in mortality after fractures at this site, but also revealed delayed timing of surgical treatment. Insufficient attention to osteoporosis as a cause of fractures and the rare prescription of anti-osteoporotic drugs were identified, indicating the necessity of implementing a system for the prevention of repeat fractures.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Maria I. Fominykh

Ural State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: fominykh_m@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5906-9895
SPIN-code: 5602-4982

MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine), Assistant Professor

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg

Ludmila P. Evstigneeva

Ural State Medical University; Sverdlovsk Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1

Email: levstigneyeva@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4010-1888
SPIN-code: 2228-0470

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg; Yekaterinburg

Elena A. Volokitina

Ural State Medical University

Email: Volokitina_elena@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5994-8558
SPIN-code: 3271-1949

MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg

Roman V. Ryabov

Ural State Medical University

Email: Rrv2903@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0834-4409

MD

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg

Denis A. Gavrikov

Ural State Medical University

Email: gavrik.de@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0004-2098-4665
SPIN-code: 2337-6553

MD

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg

References

  1. Borgström F, Karlsson L, Ortsäter G, et al. Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):59. doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-0706-y EDN: AFVZLM
  2. Goswami R. Primer on the metabolic bone diseases and disorders of mineral metabolism. Indian J Med Res. 2016;144(3):489–490. doi: 10.4103/0971-5916.198664
  3. Piscitelli P, Feola M, Rao C, et al. Ten years of hip fractures in Italy: For the first time a decreasing trend in elderly women. World J Orthop. 2014;5(3):386–391. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.386
  4. Lesnyak OM, Baranova IA, Belova KYu, et al. Osteoporosis in Russian Federation: Epidemiology, socio-medical and economical aspects (review). Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2018;24(1):155–168. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-1-155-168 EDN: YVGNSE
  5. Marks R. Hip fracture epidemiological trends, outcomes, and risk factors, 1970-2009. Int J Gen Med. 2010;3:1–17.
  6. Dhanwal DK, Dennison EM, Harvey NC, Cooper C. Epidemiology of hip fracture: Worldwide geographic variation. Indian J Orthop. 2011;45(1):15–22. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.73656 EDN: GOEYIS
  7. Menyshikova LV, Chramtsova NA, Ershova OB, et al Proximal femur fracture outcomes in elderly people and their medico-social consequences. Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2002;40(4):11–14. EDN: QINCUZ
  8. Kuzmina LI. Epidemiology, risk factors and medico-social aspects of the consequences of osteoporosis of the proximal femur in residents of Yekaterinburg of older age groups [dissertation abstract]. Yaroslavl; 2002. 25 p. (In Russ.)
  9. Gladkova EN, Khodyrev VN, Lesnyak OM. Analysis of the status of medical care provision and outcomes in patients with proximal femur fracture (data from a population-based study). Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2011;14(3):7–10. (In Russ.) EDN: OTTEHV
  10. Bakhtiyarova SA. A prospective study of the quality of life and socio-economic consequences of complicated osteoporosis [dissertation]. Moscow; 2009. 132 p. (In Russ.)
  11. Belov MV, Belova KYu. Contemporary view of medical care of the elderly people with proximal femur fractures. Russian Journal of Geriatric Medicine. 2021;(2):186–195. doi: 10.37586/2686-8636-2-2021-176-185 EDN: MOFUQX
  12. Ershova OB, Belova KYu, Degtyarev AA, et al. Analysis of mortality in patients with a fracture of the proximal femur. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2015;18(3):3–8. doi: 10.14341/osteo201533-8 EDN: XQVYSR
  13. Pincus D, Ravi B, Wasserstein D, et al. Association between wait time and 30-day mortality in adults undergoing hip fracture surgery. JAMA. 2017;318(20):1994–2003. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.17606
  14. Moran CG, Wenn RT, Sikand M, Taylor AM. Early mortality after hip fracture: is delay before surgery important? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(3):483–489. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.01796
  15. COVID Surg Collaborative. Elective surgery cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic: global predictive modelling to inform surgical recovery plans. Br J Surg. 2020;107(11):1440–1449. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11746 EDN: ENLTGM
  16. Fessler J, Jacobsen T, Lauritzen JB, Jørgensen HL. Mortality among hip fracture patients infected with COVID-19 perioperatively. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021;47(3):659–664. doi: 10.1007/s00068-021-01634-y
  17. Dyer SM, Crotty M, Fairhall N, et al. A critical review of the long-term disability outcomes following hip fracture. BMC Geriatr. 2016;16(1):158. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0332-0 EDN: NWFBKY
  18. Osnes E, Lofthus K, Meyer C et al. Consequences of hip fracture on activities of daily life and residential needs. Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(7):567–574. doi: 10.1007/s00198-003-1583-0 EDN: XUGUKZ
  19. Vochteloo AJ, Moerman S, Tuinebreijer WE, et al. More than half of hip fracture patients do not regain mobility in the first postoperative year. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2013;13(2):334–341. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0594.2012.00904.x
  20. Belaya ZE, Belova KY, Biryukova EV et al. Federal clinical guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2021;24(2):4–47. doi: 10.14341/osteo12930 EDN: TUONYE
  21. Lai H, Fan J, Liu H, et al. Fracture liaison services combined with online home nursing care in fragility hip fracture: a comparative effectiveness pilot study. Arch Osteoporos. 2023;18(1):33. doi: 10.1007/s11657-023-01221-1 EDN: MGZSNG
  22. Yan C, Chen Y, Cao J, et al. The effectiveness of fracture liaison services in patients with hip fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Heliyon. 2023;9(10):e20838. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20838 EDN: EYHTJW
  23. Frederiksen A, Abrahamsen B, Johansen PB, Sørensen HA. Danish, national cross-sectional observational study on the prevalence of prior major osteoporotic fractures in adults presenting with hip fracture-limitations and scope for fracture liaison services in prevention of hip fracture. Osteoporos Int. 2018;29(1):109–114. doi: 10.1007/s00198-017-4247-1 EDN: VEEKVE
  24. Beaupre LA, Lier D, Smith C et al. STOP-Fracture Team. A 3i hip fracture liaison service with nurse and physician co-management is cost-effective when implemented as a standard clinical program. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):113. doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-00781-w. Erratum in: Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):136. doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-00781-w.Erratumin
  25. Li N, van Oostwaard M, van den Bergh JP et al. Health-related quality of life of patients with a recent fracture attending a fracture liaison service: a 3-year follow-up study. Osteoporos Int. 2022 Mar;33(3):577–588. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-06204-x EDN: ZFKSQY

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Sampling flow chart. ППОБ, proximal femur fracture; ЦГКБ, Central City Clinical Hospital No. 23.

Download (202KB)
3. Fig. 2. Survival analysis within one year after proximal femoral fracture.

Download (61KB)

Copyright (c) 2025 Eco-Vector



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 71733 от 08.12.2017.