↓ Skip to main content

A pragmatic study exploring the prevention of delirium among hospitalized older hip fracture patients: Applying evidence to routine clinical practice using clinical decision support

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, October 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A pragmatic study exploring the prevention of delirium among hospitalized older hip fracture patients: Applying evidence to routine clinical practice using clinical decision support
Published in
Implementation Science, October 2010
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-5-81
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jayna M Holroyd-Leduc, Greg A Abelseth, Farah Khandwala, James L Silvius, David B Hogan, Heidi N Schmaltz, Cyril B Frank, Sharon E Straus

Abstract

Delirium occurs in up to 65% of older hip fracture patients. Developing delirium in hospital has been associated with a variety of adverse outcomes. Trials have shown that multi-component preventive interventions can lower delirium rates. The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of an evidence-based electronic care pathway, which incorporates multi-component delirium strategies, among older hip fracture patients. We conducted a pragmatic study using an interrupted time series design in order to evaluate the use and impact of the intervention. The target population was all consenting patients aged 65 years or older admitted with an acute hip fracture to the orthopedic units at two Calgary, Alberta hospitals. The primary outcome was delirium rates. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, in-hospital falls, in-hospital mortality, new discharges to long-term care, and readmissions. A Durbin Watson test was conducted to test for serial correlation and, because no correlation was found, Chi-square statistics, Wilcoxon test and logistic regression analyses were conducted as appropriate. At study completion, focus groups were conducted at each hospital to explore issues around the use of the order set. During the 40-week study period, 134 patients were enrolled. The intervention had no effect on the overall delirium rate (33% pre versus 31% post; p = 0.84). However, there was a significant interaction between study phase and hospital (p = 0.03). Although one hospital did not experience a decline in delirium rate, the delirium rate at the other hospital declined from 42% to 19% (p = 0.08). This difference by hospital was mirrored in focus group feedback. The hospital that experienced a decline in delirium rates was more supportive of the intervention. Overall, post-intervention there were no significant differences in mean length of stay (12 days post versus 14 days pre; p = 0.74), falls (6% post versus 10% pre; p = 0.43) or discharges to long-term care (6% post versus 13% pre; p = 0.20). Translation of evidence-based multi-component delirium prevention strategies into everyday clinical care, using the electronic medical record, was not found to be effective at decreasing delirium rates among hip facture patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 4%
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 70 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 5 6%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 23 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 31%
Psychology 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 November 2012.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,728
of 1,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,471
of 108,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 108,804 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.