Incidence of bone protection and associated fragility injuries in patients with proximal femur fractures

Abstract Objectives Our aim was to investigate whether patients presenting with fragility fractures of the proximal femur are receiving osteoporosis treatment and to assess the number of other fragility fractures they have sustained prior to admission. Methods All patients presenting to our institution with fragility fractures of the proximal femur within an 18-month period (January 2012–August 2013) were included. Patient demographics; fracture classification (AO/OTA); American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade; Abbreviated Mental Test Score (AMTS) on admission; type of operation; time to operation; peri -operative complications; length of hospital stay (LOS); walking status; osteoporotic medication; Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) results; additional fragility fractures; and mortality were collected and analysed. Results A total of 1004 patients (278 male) met the inclusion criteria and were included into the study. The mean age was 82.01 years and mean LOS was 19.54 days. Fifty-four per cent of the patients were admitted from their own homes whereas 43% were capable to walk indoors without any aids before their injury. Mean time to surgery was 2.06 days (Median: 1.31, range: 0–26 days). Three hundred and six patients (30.5%) had at least another fragility fracture before the index episode (mean 1.40 fractures; SD: 0.71 fractures; range: 1–6 fractures). Only 16.4% were under complete osteoporosis treatment on admission, defined as receiving calcium with vitamin D and a bisphosphonate or an alternative agent. When we compared patients without a history of a previous fragility fracture (Group A) and patients with at least another previous fragility fracture (Group B), we found that patients in Group B had a significantly lower AMTS score, lower bone mineral density (BMD) as evident on the DEXA scan, an inferior mobility before admission and a higher incidence of extracapsular fractures (p  On discharge, patients in Group B had a higher chance of receiving complete bone protection compared to group A (27.9% versus 41.7%; p  Following discharge, 11.2% of the patients sustained an additional fragility fracture. The mean time from the index episode to the additional fracture was 0.65 years, whilst these injuries were more frequent in Group B (RR = 1.638; p  Conclusion Patients presenting with a hip fracture are generally under-treated for osteoporosis. Post-operative assessment by a designated geriatrician and use of a standardised protocol is of paramount importance for reducing the risk of additional fragility fractures. Additionally, screening of the elderly population for identifying the patients who suffer from osteoporosis can potentially reduce the risk of sustaining a further fragility fracture.