Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013:2013:875968.
doi: 10.1155/2013/875968. Epub 2013 Dec 17.

Home-Based Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation following Hip Fracture Surgery: What Is the Evidence?

Kathleen Donohue  1 , Richelle Hoevenaars  1 , Jocelyn McEachern  1 , Erica Zeman  1 , Saurabh Mehta  2
Affiliations
Review

Home-Based Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation following Hip Fracture Surgery: What Is the Evidence?

Kathleen Donohue et al. Rehabil Res Pract. 2013.

Abstract

Objective. To determine the effects of multidisciplinary home rehabilitation (MHR) on functional and quality of life (QOL) outcomes following hip fracture surgery. Methods. Systematic review methodology suggested by Cochrane Collboration was adopted. Reviewers independently searched the literature, selected the studies, extracted data, and performed critical appraisal of studies. Summary of the results of included studies was provided. Results. Five studies were included. Over the short-term, functional status and lower extremity strength were better in the MHR group compared to the no treatment group (NT). Over the long-term, the MHR group showed greater improvements in balance confidence, functional status, and lower extremity muscle strength compared to NT group, whereas the effect on QOL and mobility was inconsistent across the studies. Several methodological issues related to study design were noted across the studies. Conclusion. The MHR was found to be more effective compared to the NT in improving functional status and lower extremity strength in patients with hip fracture surgery. Results of this review do not make a strong case for MHR due to high risk of bias in the included studies. Further research is required to accurately characterize the types of disciplines involved in MHR and frequency and dosage of intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow Diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Handoll HH, Sherrington C, Mak JC. Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011;(3)CD001704 - PubMed
    1. Kaffashian S, Raina P, Oremus M, et al. The burden of osteoporotic fractures beyond acute care: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) Age and Ageing. 2011;40(5):602–607. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leslie WD, Metge CJ, Azimaee M, et al. Direct costs of fractures in Canada and trends 1996–2006: a population-based cost-of-illness analysis. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2011;26(10):2419–2429. - PubMed
    1. Crotty M, Unroe K, Cameron ID, Miller M, Ramirez G, Couzner L. Rehabilitation interventions for improving physical and psychosocial functioning after hip fracture in older people. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010;(1)CD007624 - PubMed
    1. Chiu M-H, Hwang H-F, Lee H-D, Chien D-K, Chen C-Y, Lin M-R. Effect of fracture type on health-related quality of life among older women in Taiwan. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2012;93(3):512–519. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources