Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 616

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Orthogeriatric Care Models and Outcomes in Hip Fracture Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open access
Grigoryan, Konstantin V., Javedan, Houman, Rudolph, James L.·2014·Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Hip fractures are common, morbid, and costly health events that threaten independence and function of older patients. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine if orthogeriatric collaboration models improve outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Articles in English and Spanish languages were searched in the electronic databases including MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Registry from 1992 to 2012. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they described an inpatient multidisciplinary approach to hip fracture management involving an orthopaedic surgeon and a geriatrician. Studies were grouped into 3 following categories: routine geriatric consultation, geriatric ward with orthopaedic consultation, and shared care. After independent review of 1480 citations by 2 authors, 18 studies (9094 patients) were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: In-hospital mortality, length of stay, and long-term mortality outcomes were collected. DATA SYNTHESIS: A random effects model meta-analysis determined whether orthogeriatric collaboration was associated with improved outcomes. The overall meta-analysis found that orthogeriatric collaboration was associated with a significant reduction of in-hospital mortality [relative risk 0.60; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.43-0.84) and long-term mortality (relative risk 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.94). Length of stay (standardized mean difference -0.25; 95% CI, -0.44 to -0.05) was significantly reduced, particularly in the shared care model (standardized mean difference -0.61; 95% CI, -0.95 to -0.28), but heterogeneity limited this interpretation. Other variables such as time to surgery, delirium, and functional status were measured infrequently. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports orthogeriatric collaboration to improve mortality after hip repair. Further study is needed to determine the best model of orthogeriatric collaboration and if these partnerships improve functional outcomes.

Overview

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 · 10.1097/bot.0b013e3182a5a045

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 616

Metadata

Authors
Grigoryan, K. V., Javedan, H., & Rudolph, J. L.
Venue
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2014-03
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
e49-e55
ISSN
0890-5339 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026505782
Cited by
616
References
0
FWCI
24.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Orthogeriatric Care Models and Outcomes in Hip Fracture Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/bot.0b013e3182a5a045
The paper
Grigoryan, K. V., Javedan, H., & Rudolph, J. L. (2014). Orthogeriatric Care Models and Outcomes in Hip Fracture Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. https://doi.org/10.1097/bot.0b013e3182a5a045

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.