SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Risk factors for postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Front Aging Neurosci · 2022-08-03

DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.960364PMID: 35992597

Open accessSystematic Review; systematic-review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectivesThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify the potential risk factors for postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fracture.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception until December 31st, 2021. A combined searching strategy of subject words and free words was adopted. Studies involving risk factors for postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgeries were reviewed. Qualities of included studies were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were pooled and a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsA total of 37 studies were included. The following risk factors were significant: advanced age (per year increase) (OR: 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.07), age>80 years (OR: 2.26, 95% CI 1.47-3.47), male (OR: 1.53, 95% CI 1.37-1.70), preoperative cognitive impairment (OR:3.20, 95% CI 2.12-4.83), preoperative dementia (OR: 2.74, 95% CI 2.18-3.45), preoperative delirium (OR: 9.23, 95% CI 8.26-10.32), diabetes (OR: 1.18, 95% CI 1.05-1.33), preoperative functional dependence (OR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.56), ASA level (per level increase) (OR: 1.63, 95% CI 1.04-2.57), ASA level≥3(OR: 1.76, 95% CI 1.39-2.24), low albumin (OR: 3.30, 95% CI 1.44-7.55), medical comorbidities (OR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.06-1.25), Parkinson's disease (OR: 4.17, 95% CI 1.68-10.31) and surgery delay>48 h (OR: 1.90, 95% CI 1.36-2.65).ConclusionsClinicians should be alert to patients with those risk factors. To identify the risk factors more precisely, more research studies with larger sample size and better design should be conducted.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.