Hip fracture Injury, Occupational Diseases, Poisoning Fracture of neck of femur (hip fracture)
Conditions
Interventions
Participants will be randomly allocated to the enhanced rehabilitation arm or the usual care arm. Randomisation is performed using a secure 24 hour web based randomisation program. Participants will b
Sponsors
University of Liverpool
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Aged 60 years or older 2. Recent proximal hip fracture including intracapsular, extracapsular (peri-trochanteric, inter-trochanteric, reverse oblique or sub-trochanteric) 3. Surgical repair by replacement arthroplasty or internal fixation 4. Living in their own home prior to hip fracture 5. Living and receiving rehabilitation from the NHS in the area covered by the trial centres
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Living in residential or nursing homes prior to hip fracture 2. Unable to understand English or Welsh 3. Lacking mental capacity to give informed consent
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Difference in performance of activities of daily living, assessed using the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale at the baseline, after 4 months and after 12 months | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Current secondary outcome measures as of 21/03/2025: The following will be compared between the enhanced rehabilitation programme and usual care: 1. Cost-effectiveness of the enhanced rehabilitation programme compared with usual care, assessed using a cost-utility analysis from a health service and personal social care perspective using the following: 1.1. EuroQol EQ-5D-3L, completed at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 1.2. Bespoke Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI) 2. Effectiveness in terms of performance of activities of daily living after 17 weeks, assessed using the NEADL scale at the baseline and after 17 weeks follow-up 3. Effectiveness in terms of anxiety and depression, assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 4. Changes in self-efficacy, hip pain, cognitive function measured using the Abbreviated Mental Test Score (AMTS), fear of falling and physical function as potential mediators for improving activities of daily living: 4.1. Self-efficacy, assessed using the International Self-Efficacy Scale at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 4.2. Hip pain, assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 4.3. Fear of falling, assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 4.4. Physical function, assessed using grip strength with a hand dynamometer and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up 5. Change in caregiver strain, anxiety and depression in carers, assessed using the following at the baseline and after 17 and 52 weeks of follow-up: 5.1. Carer Strain Index (CSI) 5.2. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 6. Mechanisms and processes that explain the implementation and impacts of the enhanced rehabilitation programme, assessed using a process evaluation including: 6.1. Qualitati | — |
Countries
England, United Kingdom, Wales
Contacts
Public ContactClaire Soady
Outcome results
None listed