From: Enhanced recovery after surgery for hip fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Studies | Years | Country, Center | Number(E/C) | Mean age(E/C) | Male/Female | Follow-up duration | Type of fracture | Study design |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pollmann (Pollmann et al. 2019) | 2019 | Single-center, Norway | 1140/1090 | 79.6/79.7 | 701/1529 | 1 year | Proximal femur fracture | Cohort study |
Kang (Kang et al. 2019) | 2019 | Single-center, China | 50/50 | 77.81/78.32 | 31/69 | 30 d | Intertrochanteric fracture | Cohort study |
Gomez (Gomez et al. 2019) | 2019 | Single-center, France | 27/27 | 84.5/85.0 | 14/40 | 1 year | Peritrochanteric fracture | Cohort study |
Haugan (Haugan et al. 2017) | 2017 | Single center, Norway | 1032/788 | 83.1/83.1 | 512/1308 | 1 year | Hip fracture | Cohort study |
Liu (Liu et al. 2017) | 2017 | Multicenter, USA | 2514/2488 | 79.7/79.3 | 1586/3416 | 30 d | Hip fracture | Cohort study |
Macfie (Macfie et al. 2012) | 2012 | Single-center, Denmark | 117/115 | 82.5/82.7 | 52/180 | 6 months | Proximal femoral fractures | Cohort study |
Pedersen (Pedersen 2008) | 2008 | England | 178/357 | / | 127/408 | 1 year | Hip fracture | Cohort study |