Cited by 344Intensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersAnesthesia and Neurotoxicity ResearchHip and Femur Fractures

The incidence of delirium associated with orthopedic surgery: a meta-analytic review

Open access
Bruce, Angela J., Ritchie, Craig W., Blizard, Robert, Lai, Rosalind, Raven, Peter·2007·International Psychogeriatrics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature regarding the incidence of delirium following orthopedic surgery. METHODS: Relevant papers were sourced from online databases and gray literature. Included studies used a validated diagnostic method to measure the incidence of delirium in a prospective sample of adult/elderly orthopedic patients. Data were subject to meta-analysis after stratification by type of surgery (elective v. emergency) and inclusion/exclusion of pre-existing cognitive impairment. A funnel plot assessed for publication bias. RESULTS: 26 publications reported an incidence of postoperative delirium of 4-53.3% in hip fracture samples and 3.6-28.3% in elective samples. Significant heterogeneity was evident, and this persisted despite stratification. Hip fracture was associated with a higher risk of delirium than elective surgery both when the cognitively impaired were included in the sample (random effects pooled estimate = 21.7% [95% CI = 14.6-28.8] vs. 12.1% [95% CI = 9.6-14.6]), and when the cognitively impaired were excluded (random effects pooled estimate = 25% [95% CI = 15.7-34.7] vs. 8.8% [95% CI = 4.1-13.6]). The funnel plot showed a deficit of small studies showing low risk and large studies showing high risk. In eight hip fracture studies, the proportion of delirium cases with a preoperative onset ranged from 34 to 92%. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium occurs more commonly with hip fracture than elective surgery, and frequently has a preoperative onset when associated with trauma. Recommendations are made with the aim of standardizing future research in order to further explore and reduce the heterogeneity and possible publication bias observed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s104161020600425x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bruce, A. J., Ritchie, C. W., Blizard, R., Lai, R., & Raven, P.
Affiliations
  • Waitemata District Health Board (NZ)
  • The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
Venue
International Psychogeriatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-04
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
197-214
ISSN
1041-6102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045612157
Cited by
344
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 18
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Psychogeriatrics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Anesthesia and Neurotoxicity Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip and Femur Fractures
Keywords
postoperative delirium, orthopedic surgery, hip fracture, elective surgery, emergency surgery, incidence, elderly patients, publication bias
MeSH terms
Aged, Cognition Disorders, Delirium, Hip Fractures, Humans, Incidence, Orthopedic Procedures

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