Post-discharge use of assistive devices following hemiarthroplasty: comparison of fracture patients with or without hip precautions

Abstract

Purpose: To describe which types of assistive devices prescribed and actually used, either due to precautions or due to true functional reasons, after hip fracture-related hemiarthroplasty.

Materials and methods: About 394 patients cluster-randomized 2010–2014 at a university hospital. Control group with standard postoperative precautions to reduce dislocations, mandatory assistive devices and knee brace for 6 weeks (in cognitively impaired) compared to non-precaution group with assistive devices only if needed. Postal questionnaire at 6 weeks and 3 months.

Results: Both prescription and usage of reacher were higher in the precaution group. About 55% of patients with precautions was instructed to use stocking aids, 21% continued to do so. Significantly fewer without precautions, 11%, used it at 3 months. Raised toilet seat was used by ∼40% of all pre-fracture and was prescribed to 79% with precautions. It was unchanged at 42% in non-precaution group. Nevertheless, 64% in non-precaution group used a raised toilet both at 6 weeks and 3 months. The usage persisted around 70% in precaution group. Usage of raised chair/bed were similar, even if non-precaution patients was not prescribed such. In the precaution group, 102 were prescribed a knee brace, only 5 used it at 6 weeks.

Conclusions: The use of assistive devices did not follow what was prescribed from the hospital, regardless of precautions or not. The use of higher furniture was similar regardless of precautions or not. Other devices were more common in the precaution group. The compliance of knee bracing was low, and bracing should not be standard-of-care.

Implications for rehabilitation

• Hemiarthroplasty is the most common treatment of displaced femoral neck fracture in elderly. Dislocation occur in 2 to 10% of these patients, and traditionally patients have been instructed to be careful when moving their leg and to use a number of assistive devices, in order to reduce the dislocation risk.

• The evidence base for such precautions is weak and occupational therapy and assistive devices may be costly. The current study shows that prescriptions and instructions from occupational therapists in hospital is more or less not follow after dismissal.

• Assistive devices should be prescribed based on the hip fracture patient’s true functional needs, and not routinely or due to arthroplasty precautions.

Keywords:

• Assistive device
• hemiarthroplasty
• hip fracture
• precautions
• occupational therapy
• reacher
• stocking aids

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all orthopedic staff at Skane University Hospital engaged in running the study, and all study participants for their contributions. There was no external funding of the study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.