Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maffulli, N.
Right arrow Articles by Golden, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maffulli, N.
Right arrow Articles by Golden, M. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Age and Ageing, Vol 28, 458-462, Copyright © 1999 by British Geriatrics Society

ARTICLES

Nutritional differences in patients with proximal femoral fractures

N Maffulli, TW Dougall, MT Brown and MH Golden
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Aberdeen Medical School, Scotland, UK. n.maffulli@abdn.ac.uk

BACKGROUND: The reason why elderly human hips tend to break in one of two anatomical regions is uncertain. Nutritional factors may affect the site of fracture. OBJECTIVE: To assess possible nutritional differences in patients with proximal femoral fractures. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: University teaching hospital. SUBJECTS: 119 consecutive patients over the age of 65 with a hip fracture admitted to the trauma wards in a single centre. METHODS: One researcher measured triceps, biceps and supra-iliac skinfold thickness, and mid upper arm circumference on admission and on the fifth post- operative day. Body mass index was calculated for each patient, and used to classify patients as severely, moderately or mildly malnourished, normal, overweight or obese. Logistic regression was used to determine the influence of various factors on fracture site. RESULTS: According to their body mass index, 31% of patients were classified as malnourished and 11% as severely malnourished. Patients with intracapsular fractures were significantly more malnourished than patients with trochanteric fractures (P < 0.008). Nutritional status was not related to post-operative complications. Ability to weigh a patient on the fifth post-operative day was the single most important prognostic indicator for complications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with intracapsular fractures are more malnourished. Those with trochanteric fractures tend to be overweight.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.