Patient Reported Outcome Measures Following Surgical Fixation of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures in Elderly Population: A Short Term Retrospective Observational Study
Authors
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
Background: Intertrochanteric hip fractures in elderly patients are associated with significant morbidity, functional decline, and reduced quality of life. While surgical fixation is the standard of care, assessment of recovery using patient-reported outcome measures provides valuable insight beyond traditional clinical outcomes. Objectives: To evaluate short-term patient-reported outcomes following surgical fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures in elderly patients using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Methods: This retrospective observational study included elderly patients who underwent surgical fixation for intertrochanteric hip fractures at a tertiary care center. Patients were followed for one year postoperatively. Outcomes were assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, evaluating five health domains: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Data were analyzed descriptively and presented as frequencies and percentages. Results: A total of 33 patients were included in the final analysis after excluding deaths and losses to follow-up. The mean age of the study population was 74.23 years. Most patients reported favorable outcomes at final follow-up, with more than half indicating no problems across EQ-5D-5L domains. Improvements were most prominent in mobility, self-care, and usual activities. However, a subset of patients continued to report residual pain/discomfort and symptoms of anxiety or depression. Conclusion: Surgical fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures results in favorable short-term patient-reported outcomes in the majority of elderly patients. Incorporating patient-reported outcome measures such as EQ-5D-5L is essential for comprehensive evaluation, and a multidisciplinary postoperative approach is recommended to optimize recovery and quality of life.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Sandeep MMR, Dr. Ezhil Vikrama Vell G., Dr. Hari Prasath P.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons License All articles published in Annals of Medicine and Medical Sciences are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
[1] Abrahamsen B, van Staa T, Ariely R, Olson M, Cooper C. Excess mortality following hip fracture: a systematic epidemiological review. Osteoporos Int. 2009;20(10):1633–1650. doi:10.1007/s00198-009-0920-3
[2] Johansen A, Mansor M, Beck S, Mahoney H, Thomas S. Outcome following hip fracture: post-discharge residence and long-term mortality. Age Ageing. 2010;39(5):653–656. doi:10.1093/ageing/afq074
[3] Rolfson O, Bohm E, Franklin P, Lyman S, Denissen G, Dawson J, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries: recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis. Acta Orthop. 2016;87(Suppl 1):9–23. doi:10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816
[4] Gagnier JJ. Patient-reported outcomes in orthopaedics. J Orthop Res. 2017;35(10):2098–2108. doi:10.1002/jor.23604
[5] Haywood KL, Brett J, Tutton E, Staniszewska S. Patient-reported outcome measures in older people with hip fracture: a systematic review of quality and acceptability. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(4):799–812. doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1424-1
[6] Wang K, Eftang CN, Jakobsen RB, Årøen A. Review of response rates over time in registry-based studies using patient-reported outcome measures. BMJ Open. 2020;10(8):e030808. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030808
[7] Peeters CM, Visser E, van de Ree CL, Gosens T, den Oudsten BL, de Vries J. Quality of life after hip fracture in the elderly: a systematic literature review. Injury. 2016;47(7):1369–1382. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.04.018
[8] EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy.1990;16(3):199–208. doi:10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
[9] Devlin NJ, Parkin D, Janssen B. An introduction to EQ-5D instruments and their applications. In: Devlin NJ, Parkin D, Janssen B, editors. Methods for Analysing and Reporting EQ-5D Data. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 1–22. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-47622-9_1
[10] Jyani G, Sharma A, Prinja S, Kar SS, Trivedi M, Patro BK, et al. Development of an EQ-5D value set for India using an extended design (DEVINE) study: the Indian 5-level version EQ-5D value set. Value Health.2022;25(7):1218–1226. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1370
[11] Prakash AK, Shanthappa AH, Venkataraman S, Kamath A. A comparative study of functional outcome following dynamic hip screw and proximal femoral nailing for intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. Cureus.2022;14(4):e23803. doi:10.7759/cureus.23803
[12] Lu Y, Huang Q, Xu Y, Ren C, Sun L, Dong W, et al. Predictors of long-term mortality after intertrochanteric fracture surgery: a 3-year retrospective study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):472. doi:10.1186/s12891-022-05442-2
[13] Ghasemi F, Esmaeilnejad-Ganji SM, Manafi Rasi A, Afzal S, Baroutkoub M, Tavassoli M. Evaluation of quality of life and associated factors in patients with intertrochanteric femoral fracture. PLoS One. 2023;18(11):e0293686. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0293686
[14] van der Vet P, Wilson S, Houwert RM, Verleisdonk EJ, Heng M. Quality and reporting of patient-reported outcomes in elderly patients with hip fracture: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2022;12(12):e058197. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058197
[15] Rajendran, Kathiravan1; Udayakumar, Sharath2; Dhandapani, Abinaya1. Assessment of Depression, Anxiety, Stress and Eating Disorders among Pre-professional Coaching Students in Udaipur: A Cross-sectional Study. NMO Journal ():10.4103/JNMO.JNMO_83_25, January 07, 2026. | DOI: 10.4103/JNMO.JNMO_83_25
[16] Kjærvik C, Gjertsen JE, Stensland E, Dybvik EH, Søereide O. Patient-reported outcome measures in hip fracture patients. Bone Joint J. 2024;106-B(4):394–400. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.106B4.BJJ-2023-0904.R1