Cited by 238Hip and Femur FracturesBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrailty in Older Adults

A multidisciplinary, multifactorial intervention program reduces postoperative falls and injuries after femoral neck fracture

Open access
Stenvall, M., Olofsson, B., Lundström, M., Englund, U., Borssén, B., Svensson, O., Nyberg, L., Gustafson, Y.·2007·Osteoporosis International

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates whether a postoperative multidisciplinary, intervention program, including systematic assessment and treatment of fall risk factors, active prevention, detection, and treatment of postoperative complications, could reduce inpatient falls and fall-related injuries after a femoral neck fracture. METHODS: A randomized, controlled trial at the orthopedic and geriatric departments at Umeå University Hospital, Sweden, included 199 patients with femoral neck fracture, aged >or=70 years. RESULTS: Twelve patients fell 18 times in the intervention group compared with 26 patients suffering 60 falls in the control group. Only one patient with dementia fell in the intervention group compared with 11 in the control group. The crude postoperative fall incidence rate was 6.29/1,000 days in the intervention group vs 16.28/1,000 days in the control group. The incidence rate ratio was 0.38 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.20 - 0.76, p=0.006] for the total sample and 0.07 (95% CI: 0.01-0.57, p=0.013) among patients with dementia. There were no new fractures in the intervention group but four in the control group. CONCLUSION: A team applying comprehensive geriatric assessment and rehabilitation, including prevention, detection, and treatment of fall risk factors, can successfully prevent inpatient falls and injuries, even in patients with dementia.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00198-006-0226-7

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A range of positive effects are reported after six to twelve months for nutritional interventions in orthogeriatric patients, e.g. reduced length of hospital stay, improved independence in activities of daily living, improved mobility, reduced in-hospital falls and fall-related injuries, decreased emergency department visits, significantly fewer days of delirium, fewer pressure ulcers, reduced-nut

    “A range of positive effects are reported after six to twelve months, e.g.reduced length of hospital stay (55,56), improved independence in activities of daily living (56,192,193), improved mobility (56), reduced in-hospital falls and fall-related injuries (57), decreased emergency department visits (192) significantly fewer days of delirium (55), fewer pressure ulcers (55), reduced nursing home ad”

    From ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics (2022) · cites this paper as [56]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stenvall, M., Olofsson, B., Lundström, M., Englund, U., Borssén, B., Svensson, O., Nyberg, L., & Gustafson, Y.
Affiliations
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • Luleå University of Technology (SE)
Corresponding author
Stenvall, M.
Venue
Osteoporosis International
Published
2006-10-24
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
167-175
ISSN
  • 0937-941X (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-2965
OpenAlex
W2034648301
Cited by
238
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
FWCI
9.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Osteoporosis International (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Vårdalstiftelsen
  • Kempe Foundation
  • Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip and Femur Fractures
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
femoral neck fracture, postoperative falls, fall prevention, fall risk factors, dementia, comprehensive geriatric assessment, multidisciplinary intervention, postoperative complications, hip fracture rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Delirium, Dementia, Female, Femoral Neck Fractures, Humans, Male, Patient Care Team, Postoperative Care, Postoperative Complications, Risk Factors, Program Evaluation, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review