Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Oncology Letters
      • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • Information for Authors
    • Information for Reviewers
    • Information for Librarians
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Spandidos Publications Logo
  • About
    • About Spandidos
    • Aims and Scopes
    • Abstracting and Indexing
    • Editorial Policies
    • Reprints and Permissions
    • Job Opportunities
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Contact
  • Journals
    • All Journals
    • Biomedical Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Epigenetics
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Functional Nutrition
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Molecular Medicine
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • International Journal of Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Medicine International
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular and Clinical Oncology
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Molecular Medicine Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Letters
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • Oncology Reports
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
    • World Academy of Sciences Journal
      • Information for Authors
      • Editorial Policies
      • Editorial Board
      • Aims and Scope
      • Abstracting and Indexing
      • Bibliographic Information
      • Archive
  • Articles
  • Information
    • For Authors
    • For Reviewers
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Conferences
  • Language Editing
Login Register Submit
  • This site uses cookies
  • You can change your cookie settings at any time by following the instructions in our Cookie Policy. To find out more, you may read our Privacy Policy.

    I agree
Search articles by DOI, keyword, author or affiliation
Search
Advanced Search
presentation
Biomedical Reports
Join Editorial Board Propose a Special Issue
Print ISSN: 2049-9434 Online ISSN: 2049-9442
Journal Cover
March-2026 Volume 24 Issue 3

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

Journals

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine is an international journal devoted to molecular mechanisms of human disease.

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology is an international journal devoted to oncology research and cancer treatment.

Molecular Medicine Reports

Molecular Medicine Reports

Covers molecular medicine topics such as pharmacology, pathology, genetics, neuroscience, infectious diseases, molecular cardiology, and molecular surgery.

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports is an international journal devoted to fundamental and applied research in Oncology.

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine is an international journal devoted to laboratory and clinical medicine.

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters is an international journal devoted to Experimental and Clinical Oncology.

Biomedical Reports

Biomedical Reports

Explores a wide range of biological and medical fields, including pharmacology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and molecular cardiology.

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

International journal addressing all aspects of oncology research, from tumorigenesis and oncogenes to chemotherapy and metastasis.

World Academy of Sciences Journal

World Academy of Sciences Journal

Multidisciplinary open-access journal spanning biochemistry, genetics, neuroscience, environmental health, and synthetic biology.

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

Open-access journal combining biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, and genetics to advance health through functional nutrition.

International Journal of Epigenetics

International Journal of Epigenetics

Publishes open-access research on using epigenetics to advance understanding and treatment of human disease.

Medicine International

Medicine International

An International Open Access Journal Devoted to General Medicine.

Journal Cover
March-2026 Volume 24 Issue 3

Full Size Image

Sign up for eToc alerts
Recommend to Library

  • Article
  • Citations
    • Cite This Article
    • Download Citation
    • Create Citation Alert
    • Remove Citation Alert
    • Cited By
  • Similar Articles
    • Related Articles (in Spandidos Publications)
    • Similar Articles (Google Scholar)
    • Similar Articles (PubMed)
  • Download PDF
  • Download XML
  • View XML

  • Supplementary Files
    • Supplementary_Data.pdf
Article Open Access

Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study

  • Authors:
    • Thitirut Jongutchariya
    • Jittima Saengsuwan
    • Palanthorn Loomcharoen
  • View Affiliations / Copyright

    Affiliations: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hatyai Hospital, Songkhla 90110, Thailand, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
    Copyright: © Jongutchariya et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
  • Article Number: 30
    |
    Published online on: January 8, 2026
       https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2026.2103
  • Expand metrics +
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

This article is mentioned in:


Abstract

Fragility hip fractures are highly prevalent among the elderly and are associated with substantial morbidity, disability and increased mortality. The inability to regain ambulation after surgery substantially diminishes quality of life. The identification of factors influencing postoperative ambulatory recovery is essential for optimizing patient outcomes. The present study aimed to identify postoperative prognostic factors associated with the inability to walk at 6 weeks post‑surgery in patients with fragility hip fractures. This retrospective cohort study reviewed electronic medical records of patients aged ≥50 years who sustained intertrochanteric, subtrochanteric or femoral neck fractures between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2023. At 6 weeks postsurgery, patients were categorized as either ambulatory or non‑ambulatory. Univariable and multivariable risk ratio (mRR) regression analyses were conducted to identify postoperative prognostic factors associated with ambulatory status. Among 432 patients (72.5% women; age 76.8±9.6 years), 325 (75.2%) regained ambulation at 6 weeks, while 107 (24.8%) remained non‑ambulatory. The inability to walk at hospital discharge [mRR, 25.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10.02‑63.75; P<0.001], postoperative need for oxygen support (mRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01‑1.75; P=0.038) and the presence of overall postoperative complications within 6 weeks after discharge (mRR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01‑2.32; P=0.043) were significant prognostic factors for non‑ambulation. In conclusion, the key prognostic factors identified were the inability to walk at hospital discharge, the postoperative need for oxygen support and subacute postoperative complications within 6 weeks after discharge. These findings underscore the importance of early complication detection and management in promoting recovery and improving functional outcomes.

Introduction

The global geriatric population is expanding rapidly, with individuals aged ≥65 years projected to more than double in the coming decades, reaching ~2.2 billion by the late 2070s (1). Thailand transitioned to an aged society as the proportion of its population aged ≥60 years reached approximately 20%, reflecting significant demographic aging in recent years (2). Aging is associated with multisystem decline, particularly in the musculoskeletal system, which increases vulnerability to low-energy fragility injuries. Among these, hip fractures are common and represent a major public health concern due to their association with disability, reduced quality of life, elevated mortality and substantial healthcare costs (3,4). In the United States, hospitalization costs for hip fractures exceed $30 billion annually, while in Japan they reach ~$2.99 billion (5,6). Across Asia, fragility fractures are projected to nearly double by 2050, with direct costs increasing from $9.5 billion in 2018 to $15 billion (7). In Thailand, hip fractures with hospitalization costs increased 2.5-fold between 2013 and 2022(8). Globally, hip fracture incidence is estimated at 182 cases per 100,000 individuals (95% uncertainty interval, 142-231) (9). In Thailand, the incidence of hip fractures increased annually from 2013 to 2019 before stabilizing between 2019 and 2022, with the age-standardized incidence rate rising from 116.3 cases per 100,000 individuals in 2013 to 145.1 cases in 2019, with a slight decline to 140.7 cases in 2022(8).

Within the Thai context, fragility or osteoporotic fractures are defined as hip fractures resulting from low-energy traumatic mechanisms in individuals aged ≥50 years (10). Surgical intervention remains the standard treatment, aiming to reduce mortality and prevent long-term disability. However, postoperative functional and ambulatory recovery is often suboptimal and varies considerably across studies (11-13). Previous reports have indicated that 40-60% of patients regain pre-fracture mobility and instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) within 3 to 6 months post-surgery (13,14), while more recent evidence has suggested that at 3 months, only 20% achieve satisfactory ambulation and 21.5% regain pre-injury walking ability (15). Nearly 30% fail to recover ADLs within 1 year (16), and registry data from Japan show that ~10% of previously ambulatory patients remain unable to walk at 4 months (17). Furthermore, a systematic review concluded that despite advances in anesthesia, perioperative care and rehabilitation, the 1-year mortality rate remains substantial, with a mean of 22% (range, 2.4-34.8%) and marked variation across populations (18). Ambulatory ability is an essential functional capacity in older adults, enabling them to carry out basic ADLs and maintain social participation through community ambulation (19). Therefore, early rehabilitation training after hip fracture surgery, encompassing mobility, transfer and ambulation training, is crucial for preventing complications from prolonged bed rest and enabling patients to regain mobility and independent ambulation (20-22).

Recovery of ambulatory capacity after hip fracture surgery depends on multiple factors, including preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative conditions (23). While several studies have examined preoperative and perioperative predictors (24-26), relatively few have focused on postoperative prognostic factors (27,28). Postoperative complications play a crucial role in determining functional outcomes after hip fracture surgery. Prolonged Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stays, and the need for ventilator support have been associated with increased long-term morbidity and increased mortality rates (23,29). Tangchitphisut et al (23) reported that postoperative ICU admission or ventilator use was significantly more common among patients who were unable to bear self-weight at discharge (10/55 patients, 18.2%; P<0.001). Similarly, Eschbach et al (29) found that geriatric hip-fracture patients requiring prolonged ICU care (>3 days) had markedly higher in-hospital, 6-month and 12-month mortality rates compared with those with shorter ICU stays (P=0.001). Furthermore, postoperative complications such as infections (particularly pressure ulcers), delirium, arrhythmias and respiratory issues have been linked to poorer functional and mobility outcomes (13,23,30). Recent evidence has also identified postoperative medical complications as the most significant risk factor for persistent walking disability (23,24,27). Although hip fractures profoundly affect both short and long-term outcomes, evidence regarding prognostic factors for ambulation during the early subacute period remains limited. Early identification of patients at high risk for impaired ambulation is essential to guide postoperative management, optimize rehabilitation and support caregiver planning. The 6-week timeframe represents a clinically relevant milestone, coinciding with routine follow-up, facilitating timely rehabilitation and enabling recognition of patients at risk of delayed recovery before longer-term outcomes are established. To address this gap, the present study aimed to identify postoperative prognostic factors associated with the inability to ambulate 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery.

Materials and methods

Study design and setting

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care referral center, Hatyai Hospital (Songkhla, Thailand). Data were obtained from electronic medical records (EMRs) of patients treated between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2023. The inclusion criteria were as follows: i) Age ≥50 years; ii) diagnosis of a single, closed hip fracture resulting from low-energy trauma; iii) a fracture classified as a femoral neck, intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture, identified by specific International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes (31) (S72.000-S72.019, S72.100-S72.101, S72.110-S72.111 and S72.200-S72.210); and iv) surgical treatment for a hip fracture, identified using ICD-9(32) procedure codes (79.15, 79.25, 79.35, 81.51, and 81.52). The exclusion criteria were as follows: i) Hip fractures secondary to pathological conditions (for example. malignancy); ii) multiple traumatic injuries sustained during the same admission; iii) fractures caused by high-energy trauma; iv) periprosthetic fractures or fractures involving previous nail fixation; v) conservative (non-surgical) management; vi) pre-fracture bedridden status or wheelchair dependence; vii) in-hospital mortality before discharge; and viii) incomplete or missing EMR data during the study period. The study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Hatyai Hospital (approval no. HYH EC 007-67-01).

Surgical intervention was performed using procedures appropriate for the specific type of hip fracture. Following surgery, all patients underwent a standardized postoperative rehabilitation program based on the recommendations of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (21) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (22). The program was designed to promote functional recovery and ambulation, with individual modifications made according to patient centered care principles that considered physical status, comorbidities, surgical procedure and overall tolerance. The rehabilitation protocol for ambulatory training emphasized early mobilization and included bed mobility exercises, transitions from supine to sitting, sitting balance activities, sit to stand transfers, safe pivot transfers from bed to chair or wheelchair and standing balance training. Once the patient demonstrated adequate stability, ambulation training with walking practice was introduced. Patients were encouraged to ambulate with a walker and to practice partial weight bearing on the surgical limb as tolerated. Each training session was conducted once daily for ~20 to 30 min. Routine follow-up evaluations were performed at 6 weeks postsurgery to monitor recovery, assess ambulatory status, and address ongoing complications and care needs.

Data collection

A retrospective review was conducted using the EMRs of 432 patients who underwent hip fracture surgery. Data collected included admission dates, clinical characteristics and postoperative variables considered potential prognostic factors for the inability to walk 6 weeks after surgery. Candidate postoperative predictors included: i) Postoperative ICU admission or ventilator use (23,29), which was defined to include either ICU admission regardless of ventilator support or endotracheal intubation with mechanical ventilation, in the ICU or elsewhere; ii) need for postoperative oxygen support (33,34), referred to any supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula, face mask or high-flow oxygen, administered to prevent hypoxemia and maintain a peripheral oxygen saturation level generally ≥95% (unless contraindicated); iii) urinary catheter use on the second postoperative day (23,35); iv) the presence of postoperative surgical complications (33,36), such as postoperative weight-bearing restrictions due to poor bone quality or revision surgery following fixation failure; v) anemia from postoperative blood loss (37); vi) the presence of postoperative medical complications (33,38) (such as pressure ulcers, urinary tract infection and pneumonia); vii) time to initiation of functional training (39-41) (<48, 48-72 and >72 h post-operation); viii) the ability to walk at hospital discharge; ix) the length of stay (LOS) (42); and x) the presence of overall complications within 6 weeks after discharge (23,27,33), classified as surgical, medical or mental-health related. The primary endpoint was ambulatory status 6 weeks after surgery. Patients were classified into two groups based on discharge ambulation: i) a non-ambulatory group, consisting of patients who were bedridden or wheelchair-dependent; and ii) an ambulatory group, consisting of patients who could walk independently or with the aid of a walking device.

Sample size calculation

The determination of an appropriate sample size for logistic regression typically necessitates a minimum of 5 to 10 events per candidate predictor parameter to ensure model reliability. Given that the present study included 14 exploratory variables (10 postoperative factors and 4 demographic factors to adjust the model), the corresponding requirement ranged from 90 to 140 events (43,44). Considering that the prevalence of inability to walk in this study was 24.8%, a total sample size between 364 and 565 participants was deemed optimal.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using the Stata Statistical Package (version 18.0; Stata Corp LLC). Categorical variables are presented as frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables are reported as means and standard deviations for normally distributed data or medians and interquartile ranges for skewed data. To compare proportions between the two groups (i.e., inability or ability to walk 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery), the χ2 test was used. When the expected cell count was less than five, Fisher's exact test was applied. Continuous variables were compared using Student's t-test for parametric data or a Mann-Whitney U test for non-parametric data, depending on the distribution. Variables with clinical relevance and those with P<0.25 (45-47) in an initial screening were included in the univariable analysis, with results presented as univariable risk ratios. To identify factors associated with the inability to walk 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery, a multivariable Poisson regression model was fitted with a log link and robust standard errors (48). The model was adjusted for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (49) and fracture type. The binary outcome was the ability/inability to walk at 6 weeks, and multivariable risk ratios (mRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Two-sided P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Multicollinearity among covariates was assessed using variance inflation factors (VIF), with a VIF value of <5 considered acceptable (50). During variable selection, it was found that ambulatory training and the inability to walk at discharge were collinear, and a significant association was observed between the two variables. As they are also theoretically expected to be correlated, a pragmatic approach was used to determine which variable contributed more effectively to the multivariable model (51). Inability to walk at discharge yielded a higher adjusted R-squared value and was therefore retained in the final model. All other postoperative predictors included in the analysis had VIF values <5.

Results

Study population and exclusions

A total of 629 patients with fragility hip fractures underwent surgery. Of these, 97 patients were excluded for the following reasons: 23 experienced high-energy trauma, 13 sustained multiple injuries, 10 had pathological fractures, 1 had a periprosthetic fracture, 4 died during admission, 1 required prolonged hospitalization due to the absence of a caregiver, 5 were unable to walk prior to the fracture and 40 had incomplete data collection. Consequently, 532 patients were left for the present analysis. However, 100 patients were lost to follow-up at 6 weeks postoperatively, resulting in a final study population of 432 patients. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics [age, sex, CCI, preoperative hematocrit (Hct) and fracture type] between patients who completed follow-up and those who were lost to follow-up (Table SI). The majority of included participants were female (313 patients, 72.5%) and overall age was 76.8±9.6 years (range, 52-100 years).

Comparative analysis of ambulatory and non-ambulatory patient groups at 6 weeks postoperatively

At 6 weeks postsurgery, 325 patients (75.2%) regained the ability to walk, while 107 patients (24.8%) remained non-ambulatory (Fig. 1). No statistically significant differences were observed between groups regarding BMI, smoking status, and glomerular filtration rate. However, Hct levels were significantly lower in the non-ambulatory group (31.3 vs. 33.4%; P<0.001). When comparing the two groups, the inability-to-walk group showed a significantly higher proportion of female patients (81.3 vs. 69.5%; P=0.018), higher mean age (79.3±9.6 vs. 76.0±9.4 years; P=0.001) and a lower proportion of pre-fracture independent community ambulation (35.5 vs. 71.7%; P<0.001). Additionally, this group exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of underlying diseases (92.5 vs. 82.8%; P=0.014), including diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular disease, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease or dementia, heart disease and musculoskeletal disorders. Furthermore, significant differences were found between the non-ambulatory and ambulatory group in the proportion of patients who sustained indoor falls (88.8 vs. 79.4%; P=0.049) and the distribution of fracture types (P=0.002) (Table I).

Flow diagram of patient inclusion in
the present study.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of patient inclusion in the present study.

Table I

Comparison of patients' demographic and clinical characteristics between groups with the inability and ability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery (n=432).

Table I

Comparison of patients' demographic and clinical characteristics between groups with the inability and ability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery (n=432).

VariablesInability to walk (n=107)Ability to walk (n=325)P-value
Female, n (%)87 (81.3)226 (69.5)0.018
Age, yearsa79.3±9.676.0±9.40.002
Body mass index, kg/m2a22.3±4.522.5±4.10.577
Smoking, n (%)7 (6.5)37 (11.4)0.711
Pre fracture community walking independent, n (%)38 (35.5)233 (71.7)<0.001
Underlying diseases, n (%)99 (92.5)269 (82.8)0.014
     Hypertension82 (76.6)217 (66.8)0.055
     Diabetes mellitus40 (37.4)88 (27.1)0.043
     Dyslipidemia51 (47.7)125 (38.5)0.093
     Cerebrovascular disease33 (30.8)43 (13.2)<0.001
     Parkinson's disease6 (5.6)5 (1.5)0.020
     Alzheimer's/dementia12 (11.2)15 (4.6)0.014
     Heart disease (AF/VHD/IHD)16 (15.0)23 (7.1)0.014
     Pulmonary disease6 (5.6)40 (12.3)0.051
     Anemia15 (14.0)36 (11.1)0.413
     Musculoskeletal problems19 (17.8)34 (10.5)0.046
Charlson Comorbidity Indexa5.0±1.74.1±1.5<0.001
Falling indoors, n (%)95 (88.8)258 (79.4)0.049
Fracture types, n (%)  0.002
     Subtrochanteric fracture of the femur3 (2.8)5 (1.5) 
     Intertrochanteric fracture of the femur69 (64.5)152 (46.8) 
     Femoral neck fracture35 (32.7)168 (51.7) 
Preoperative hematocrit, %a31.3±5.033.4±5.2<0.001
Glomerular filtration rate, ml/mina74.0±26.581.0±48.80.166

[i] aData are presented as the mean ± SD. AF, atrial fibrillation; VHD, valvular heart disease; IHD, ischemic heart disease.

Postoperative factors associated with ambulatory status

Regarding postoperative factors, patients in the non-ambulatory group at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery exhibited a significantly higher need for postoperative oxygen support (59.8 vs. 40.6%; P=0.001), urinary catheter use on the second postoperative day (62.6 vs. 50.5%; P=0.029), presence of postoperative surgical complications (11.2 vs. 1.8%; P<0.001) and presence of postoperative medical complications (39.2 vs. 22.5%; P=0.001). Additionally, LOS (≥14 days) was more prevalent among patients who remained unable to walk (35.5 vs. 15.4%; P<0.001), as was the occurrence of postoperative complications within 6 weeks after discharge (16.8 vs. 3.1%; P<0.001). Conversely, the attainment of ambulation training was significantly higher in the group that regained walking ability compared with that in the non-ambulatory group (86.1 vs. 28.4%; P<0.001) (Table II).

Table II

Comparison of patients' post-operative factors between groups with the inability and ability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery.

Table II

Comparison of patients' post-operative factors between groups with the inability and ability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery.

VariablesInability to walk (n=107)Ability to walk (n=325)P-value
Postoperative ICU admission or ventilator use, n (%)7 (6.5)9 (2.8)0.082
Postoperative need for oxygen support, n (%)64 (59.8)132 (40.6)0.001
Urinary catheter used in the second day post operative, n (%)67 (62.6)164 (50.5)0.029
Presence of post operative surgical complications, n (%)12 (11.2)6 (1.8)<0.001
Anemia due to post operative blood loss, n (%)45 (42.1)107 (32.9)0.086
Presence of the post operative medical complications, n (%)42 (39.3)73 (22.5)0.001
Time to start functional training, n (%)  0.056
     <24 h post-operation43 (40.2)168 (51.7) 
     24-48 h post-operation32 (29.9)92 (28.3) 
     >72 h post-operation30 (29.9)65 (20.0) 
Type of functional training, n (%)   
     Mobility training106 (99.1)327 (100.0)0.081
     Transfer training107 (100.0)323 (99.4)0.416
     Ambulation training30 (28.0)280 (86.2)<0.001
Inability to walk at discharge, n (%)102 (95.3)72 (22.2)<0.001
Length of stay ≥14 days, n (%)38 (35.5)50 (15.4)<0.001
Presence of the overall complications within 6 weeks after discharge, n (%)18 (16.8)10 (3.1)<0.001

[i] ICU, Intensive Care Unit.

Regression analysis results

The results of univariable and multivariable regression analyses are presented in Table III. In the univariate analysis, several factors emerged as significant predictors, including postoperative ICU admission or ventilator use, the need for postoperative oxygen support, urinary catheter use on the second postoperative day, the presence of postoperative surgical complications, the presence of postoperative medical complications, time to start functional training (>72 h post-operation), inability to walk at hospital discharge, LOS (≥14 days), and the occurrence of overall complications within 6 weeks post-discharge. However, the multivariable regression analysis identified only the following key prognostic factors: Inability to walk at discharge (mRR, 25.3; 95% CI, 10.0-63.8; P<0.001), postsurgery need for oxygen support (mRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01-1.75; P=0.038) and the presence of overall postsurgery complications within 6 weeks after discharge (mRR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-2.32; P=0.043) (Fig. 2).

Forest plot showing mRR of
post-operative prognostic factors of the inability to walk at 6
weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery. mRR, multivariable risk
ratio; CI, confidence interval; ICU, Intensive Care Unit.

Figure 2

Forest plot showing mRR of post-operative prognostic factors of the inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery. mRR, multivariable risk ratio; CI, confidence interval; ICU, Intensive Care Unit.

Table III

uRR and mRR of post-operative prognostic factors of patients with the inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery.

Table III

uRR and mRR of post-operative prognostic factors of patients with the inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery.

 Univariable analysisMultivariable analysis
VariablesuRR95% CIP-valuemRR95% CIP-value
Postoperative ICU admission or ventilator use1.821.02-3.250.0430.890.49-1.630.717
Postoperative need for oxygen support1.791.28-2.510.0011.331.01-1.750.038
Urinary catheter used in the second day post operative1.461.03-2.050.0311.060.81-1.390.681
Presence of post operative surgical complications2.92.00-4.21<0.0011.290.92-1.810.135
Anemia due to post operative blood loss1.340.96-1.850.0840.900.68-1.170.431
Presence of the post operative medical complications1.781.29-2.46<0.0010.920.71-1.210.572
Time to start functional training      
     <48 h post-operation Reference  Reference 
     48-72 h post-operation1.270.84-1.890.2481.050.77-1.430.746
     >72 h post-operation1.621.10-2.390.0150.920.67-1.270.620
Inability to walk at discharge30.212.58-72.7<0.00125.310.02-63.75<0.001
Length of stay ≥14 days2.151.56-2.96<0.0011.250.94-1.650.119
Presence of the overall complications within 6 weeks after discharge2.822.02-3.92<0.0011.231.01-2.320.043

[i] The multivariable risk ratio model was adjusted for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index and fracture type (subtrochanteric, intertrochanteric or femoral neck). mRR, multivariable risk ratio; uRR, univariable risk ratio; ICU, Intensive Care Unit.

Discussion

Hip fractures rank among the most serious fractures in elderly individuals, often leading to impaired function, and increased morbidity and mortality rates (13,52). Elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery frequently exhibit physical instability in the acute postoperative phase, which may delay the initiation of rehabilitation (53,54). Previous research has demonstrated that by 6 weeks postsurgery, patients typically exhibit improved physical stability, enabling participation in rehabilitation programs; however, vigilant monitoring for potential complications remains imperative (27,55). The present study aimed to identify prognostic factors associated with the inability to walk at 6 weeks following fragility hip fracture surgery. The findings emphasize the inability to walk at discharge, the postoperative need for oxygen support and the presence of postoperative complications within 6 weeks as significant predictors of ambulatory outcomes.

The presence of overall complications after discharge within 6 weeks increased the risk of the inability to walk at 6 weeks post-fragility hip fracture surgery by 1.23 times (95% CI, 1.01-2.32; P=0.043). Similarly, Chanthanapodi et al (27) reported that postoperative medical complications within the first 6 weeks were the strongest prognostic factor for the inability to walk 6 weeks after surgery, with a risk ratio (RR) of 2.04 (95% CI, 1.37-3.02; P<0.001). However, the findings of the present study contrast with those in the study by Monkuntod et al (56), which was a prospective observational cohort study on older adults diagnosed with hip fractures, scheduled for surgery and followed up for 2 weeks postoperatively at three tertiary care hospitals. The study found that adverse health outcomes during and after hospitalization did not predict poor functional ability at discharge. This discrepancy may be attributed to the shorter duration of complication recording (2 weeks) compared with both the present study and the research conducted by Chanthanapodi et al (27). Empirical evidence suggests that early identification of postoperative complications during the acute to subacute rehabilitation phase is crucial in facilitating functional recovery (33,55,57).

Ambulatory ability is a key concern for both patients and caregivers (58). Since walking ability is a crucial indicator of functional recovery, it remains a primary focus for patients undergoing surgery for fragility hip fractures during the postoperative period (59). Previous research has demonstrated that patients with hip fractures who regain early walking ability have significantly higher survival rates at both 1- and 10-years post-surgery (60). Adulkasem et al (61) reported that both pre-injury ambulatory status [odds ratio (OR), 52.72; 95% CI, 5.19-535.77] and ambulatory status at discharge (OR, 8.5; 95% CI, 3.33-21.70) were strong prognostic factors for postoperative functional recovery, underscoring the importance of baseline mobility. Similarly, the present study demonstrated a high effect estimate for the inability to walk at discharge (mRR, 25.3; 95% CI, 10.02-63.75), although the wide confidence interval observed may reflect the modest sample size and a potential risk of model overfitting. The higher effect estimates in the present study compared with those reported by Adulkasem et al (15,61) are likely attributable to differences in study populations and model specifications. While Adulkasem et al (15,61) included patients across all baseline walking abilities, including those who were non-ambulatory prior to hip fracture, the present cohort was restricted to individuals who were ambulatory before the fracture. Furthermore, the previous study analyses incorporated both pre-fracture and discharge ambulatory status as predictors, whereas the present model included only ambulatory ability at discharge. Limiting the sample to pre-fracture ambulatory patients and including a single post-fracture mobility variable may have contributed to the more pronounced effect size observed.

The postoperative need for oxygen therapy was a significant predictor of inability to walk at 6 weeks in the present study. While chest physiotherapy and bed-mobility exercises can be initiated with supplemental oxygen, achieving adequate oxygenation on room air is an essential milestone before commencing ambulation training in Hatyai Hospital. Dependence on oxygen supplementation may therefore be associated with delayed ambulation, a condition linked to an increased risk of medical complications, higher mortality rate and prolonged hospital stay (62,63). In line with this, the Clinical Insights on Thailand Postoperative Hip Fracture Care (20) recommend early mobilization programs for patients undergoing surgery for fragility hip fractures.

Although postoperative ICU admission or ventilatory support were significant in the univariate analysis, they were not significant in the multivariate model. This finding aligns with a previous study that reported no significant increase in the risk of an inability to self-bear weight at discharge among patients admitted to the ICU postoperatively or requiring ventilatory support. ICU admission and ventilatory support primarily address acute postoperative complications that are often transient and treatable with current medical interventions; therefore, they may not serve as indicators of long-term functional recovery. Additionally, these factors were associated with other stronger predictors included in the model, such as overall postoperative complications and ability to ambulate at discharge. After adjustment for these variables, ICU/ventilator use and early complications were no longer significant, suggesting that their effects were largely accounted for by these stronger predictors.

The presence of postoperative surgical complications, the presence of postoperative medical complications, urinary catheter usage on the second postoperative day and a LOS of ≥14 days were significant predictors in the univariate analysis but not in the multivariate model in the present study. Previous studies have reported conflicting findings regarding postoperative complications. While several studies have reported an association between postoperative surgical and medical complications and poorer mobility outcomes (27,64,65), the study by Tangchitphisut et al (23) found no such association. One study identified urinary catheter use as a significant predictor (35), whereas another reported no association (23). Similarly, although earlier studies reported LOS as a significant predictor (25,66), subsequent research did not confirm this association (67). Importantly, while acute postoperative complications were not independent predictors in the present multivariate analysis, late complications occurring after discharge were significantly associated with poorer walking ability. This observation supports the hypothesis that early postoperative complications may reflect transient conditions amenable to contemporary medical management, whereas late complications may exert a more profound and lasting impact on functional recovery.

Despite providing valuable insights, the present study has several limitations that warrant consideration. The single-center design may limit generalizability. Also, the final analysis included 432 patients, of whom 107 were unable to walk. With 14 variables, the events-per-variable (EPV) ratio was 7.6 (107/14), falling within the commonly accepted 5-10 range for exploratory analyses (43,44). Nevertheless, a modestly low EPV may increase the risk of model overfitting, potentially leading to wider confidence intervals and inflated effect estimates for some variables. Resource constraints such as bed shortages also necessitated early discharges and patient transfers based on healthcare coverage policies, potentially introducing referral bias that influenced outcomes. In addition, the retrospective design required excluding patients with incomplete data, which may have reduced statistical power and could potentially lead to under- or overestimation of prognostic factors. The outcome ‘inability to walk’ provides a simple measure of functional recovery but may not fully capture other aspects of postoperative function, such as independence in ADLs or mobility scores. The present study was designed to explore postoperative predictive factors rather than to develop or validate a formal predictive model. Development of a robust, clinically applicable model would require a larger sample and further research. The factors identified here should therefore be interpreted as potential predictors that may help clinicians remain vigilant when caring for patients who present with these characteristics. Finally, although multidisciplinary rehabilitation teams play a critical role in postoperative care, early identification of prognostic indicators for functional recovery remains insufficiently understood. This highlights the need for prospective, multicenter studies incorporating comprehensive geriatric assessments and rehabilitation-specific variables and outcomes to better identify patients who may benefit from additional rehabilitation support.

In conclusion, the present study identified three key prognostic factors for early functional recovery at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: The ability to ambulate at hospital discharge, the postoperative need for oxygen support and the presence of overall postoperative complications within 6 weeks. Early rehabilitation and proactive management of medical complications are critical strategies to enhance postoperative mobility and improve long-term outcomes in this vulnerable patient population.

Supplementary Material

Comparison of demographic and clinical characteristics between patients who completed follow-up and those who were lost to follow-up.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Funding: No funding was received.

Availability of data and materials

The data generated in the present study may be requested from the corresponding author.

Authors' contributions

TJ performed data collection and analysis, wrote the original draft of the manuscript, and prepared all materials. PL contributed to the data collection. JS performed data analysis and coordination, as well as supervised and revised the manuscript. TJ, PL and JS contributed to the conceptual and methodological design of the study. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. TJ and JS confirm the authenticity of all the raw data.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The protocol of this study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Hatyai Hospital (Songkhla, Thailand; approval no. HYH EC 007-67-01). All procedures involved in this study followed the ethical standards of and complied with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects 2024: Summary of Results (UN DESA/POP/2024/TR/NO. 9), 2024. https://population.un.org/wpp/assets/Files/WPP2024_Summary-of-Results.pdf.

2 

Aung TNN, Moolphate S, Koyanagi Y, Angkurawaranon C, Supakankunti S, Yuasa M and Aung MN: Determinants of health-related quality of life among community-dwelling Thai older adults in Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 15:1761–1774. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

3 

Mattisson L, Bojan A and Enocson A: Epidemiology, treatment and mortality of trochanteric and subtrochanteric hip fractures: Data from the Swedish fracture register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 19(369)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

4 

Amarilla-Donoso FJ, Lopez-Espuela F, Roncero-Martin R, Leal-Hernandez O, Puerto-Parejo LM, Aliaga-Vera I, Toribio-Felipe R and Lavado-García JM: Quality of life in elderly people after a hip fracture: A prospective study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 18(71)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

5 

Sarode AL, Su E, Drost J, Evan M, Haselton L and Blecker N: The economic burden of hip fractures in the geriatric population by mental health illness and substance use status: National estimates 2016 to 2020. Injury. 56(112615)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

6 

Mori T, Komiyama J, Fujii T, Sanuki M, Kume K, Kato G, Mori Y, Ueshima H, Matsui H, Tamiya N and Sugiyama T: Medical expenditures for fragility hip fracture in Japan: A study using the nationwide health insurance claims database. Arch Osteoporos. 17(61)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

7 

Cheung CL, Ang SB, Chadha M, Chow ES, Chung YS, Hew FL, Jaisamrarn U, Ng H, Takeuchi Y, Wu CH, et al: An updated hip fracture projection in Asia: The Asian federation of osteoporosis societies study. Osteoporos Sarcopenia. 4:16–21. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

8 

Charatcharoenwitthaya N, Nimitphong H, Wattanachanya L, Songpatanasilp T, Ongphiphadhanakul B, Deerochanawong C and Karaketklang K: Epidemiology of hip fractures in Thailand. Osteoporos Int. 35:1661–1668. 2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

9 

Dong Y, Zhang Y, Song K, Kang H, Ye D and Li F: What was the epidemiology and global Burden of disease of hip fractures from 1990 to 2019? results from and additional analysis of the global Burden of disease study 2019. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 481:1209–1220. 2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

10 

Amphansap T and Sujarekul P: Quality of life and factors that affect osteoporotic hip fracture patients in Thailand. Osteoporos Sarcopenia. 4:140–144. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

11 

Sing CW, Lin TC, Bartholomew S, Bell JS, Bennett C, Beyene K, Bosco-Lévy P, Chan AHY, Chandran M, Cheung CL, et al: Global epidemiology of hip fractures: A study protocol using a common analytical platform among multiple countries. BMJ Open. 11(e047258)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

12 

Wongtriratanachai P, Luevitoonvechkij S, Songpatanasilp T, Sribunditkul S, Leerapun T, Phadungkiat S and Rojanasthien S: Increasing incidence of hip fracture in Chiang Mai, Thailand. J Clin Densitom. 16:347–352. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Dyer SM, Crotty M, Fairhall N, Magaziner J, Beaupre LA, Cameron ID and Sherrington C: Fragility Fracture Network (FFN) Rehabilitation Research Special Interest Group. A critical review of the long-term disability outcomes following hip fracture. BMC Geriatr. 16(158)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

14 

Vochteloo AJ, Moerman S, Tuinebreijer WE, Maier AB, de Vries MR, Bloem RM, Nelissen RG and Pilot P: More than half of hip fracture patients do not regain mobility in the first postoperative year. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 13:334–341. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

15 

Adulkasem N, Chotiyarnwong P, Vanitcharoenkul E and Unnanuntana A: Ambulation recovery prediction after hip fracture surgery using the Hip fracture short-term ambulation prediction tool. J Rehabil Med. 56(jrm40780)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

16 

Kitcharanant N, Atthakomol P, Khorana J, Phinyo P and Unnanuntana A: Prognostic factors for functional recovery at 1-year following fragility hip fractures. Clin Orthop Surg. 16:7–15. 2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

17 

Hosoi T, Yakabe M, Matsumoto S, Fujimori K, Tamaki J, Nakatoh S, Ishii S, Okimoto N, Kamiya K, Akishita M, et al: Relationship between antidementia medication and fracture prevention in patients with Alzheimer's dementia using a nationwide health insurance claims database. Sci Rep. 13(6893)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

18 

Downey C, Kelly M and Quinlan JF: Changing trends in the mortality rate at 1-year post hip fracture-a systematic review. World J Orthop. 10:166–175. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

19 

Salpakoski A, Tormakangas T, Edgren J, Sihvonen S, Pekkonen M, Heinonen A, Pesola M, Kallinen M, Rantanen T and Sipilä S: Walking recovery after a hip fracture: A prospective follow-up study among community-dwelling over 60-year old men and women. Biomed Res Int. 2014(289549)2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

20 

Unnanuntana A, Kuptniratsaikul V, Srinonprasert V, Charatcharoenwitthaya N, Kulachote N, Papinwitchakul L, Wattanachanya L and Chotanaphuti T: A multidisciplinary approach to post-operative fragility hip fracture care in Thailand-a narrative review. Injury. 54(111039)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

21 

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Postoperative rehabilitation of low energy hip fractures in older adults: Appropriate use criteria. Re-issued by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Board of Directors 2023 September 9, 2025. Available from: https://www.aaos.org/globalassets/quality-and-practice-resources/hip-fractures-in-the-elderly/hip-fx-rehab-auc_reapproval.pdf.

22 

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Hip fracture: management (update): Economic model report for total hip replacement versus hemiarthroplasty. NICE guideline CG124.2023 September 9, 2025]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg124/evidence/economic-model-report-pdf-11317540285.

23 

Tangchitphisut P, Khorana J, Phinyo P, Patumanond J, Rojanasthien S and Apivatthakakul T: Prognostic factors of the inability to bear self-weight at discharge in patients with fragility femoral neck fracture: A 5-year retrospective cohort study in Thailand. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 19(3992)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

24 

Kitcharanant N, Atthakomol P, Khorana J, Phinyo P and Unnanuntana A: Predictive model of recovery to prefracture activities-of-daily-living status one year after fragility hip fracture. Medicina (Kaunas). 60(615)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

25 

Ko Y: Pre- and perioperative risk factors of post hip fracture surgery walking failure in the elderly. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 10(2151459319853463)2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

26 

Pajulammi HM, Pihlajamaki HK, Luukkaala TH and Nuotio MS: Pre- and perioperative predictors of changes in mobility and living arrangements after hip fracture-a population-based study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 61:182–189. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

27 

Chanthanapodi P, Tammata N, Laoruengthana A and Jarusriwanna A: Independent walking disability after fragility hip fractures: A prognostic factors analysis. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 15(21514593241278963)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

28 

Sheehan KJ, Guerrero EM, Tainter D, Dial B, Milton-Cole R, Blair JA, Alexander J, Swamy P, Kuramoto L, Guy P, et al: Prognostic factors of in-hospital complications after hip fracture surgery: A scoping review. Osteoporos Int. 30:1339–1351. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

29 

Eschbach D, Bliemel C, Oberkircher L, Aigner R, Hack J, Bockmann B, Ruchholtz S and Buecking B: One-year outcome of geriatric hip-fracture patients following prolonged ICU treatment. Biomed Res Int. 2016(8431213)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

30 

Cohn MR, Cong GT, Nwachukwu BU, Patt ML, Desai P, Zambrana L and Lane JM: Factors associated with early functional outcome after hip fracture surgery. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 7:3–8. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

31 

World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10 edition. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2016.

32 

World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, 2011.

33 

Carpintero P, Caeiro JR, Carpintero R, Morales A, Silva S and Mesa M: Complications of hip fractures: A review. World J Orthop. 5:402–411. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

34 

Jo YY, Park CG, Lee JY, Kwon SK and Kwak HJ: Prediction of early postoperative desaturation in extreme older patients after spinal anesthesia for femur fracture surgery: A retrospective analysis. Korean J Anesthesiol. 72:599–605. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

35 

Cecchi F, Pancani S, Antonioli D, Avila L, Barilli M, Gambini M, Landucci Pellegrini L, Romano E, Sarti C, Zingoni M, et al: Predictors of recovering ambulation after hip fracture inpatient rehabilitation. BMC Geriatr. 18(201)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

36 

Gonzalez de Villaumbrosia C, Barba R, Ojeda-Thies C, Grifol-Clar E, Alvarez-Diaz N, Alvarez-Espejo T, Cancio-Trujillo JM, Mora-Fernández J, Pareja-Sierra T, Barrera-Crispín R, et al: Predictive factors of gait recovery after hip fracture: A scoping review. Age Ageing. 54(afaf057)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

37 

Foss NB, Kristensen MT and Kehlet H: Anaemia impedes functional mobility after hip fracture surgery. Age Ageing. 37:173–178. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

38 

Kim JL, Jung JS and Kim SJ: Prediction of ambulatory status after hip fracture surgery in patients over 60 years old. Ann Rehabil Med. 40:666–674. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

39 

Malik AT, Quatman-Yates C, Phieffer LS, Ly TV, Khan SN and Quatman CE: Factors associated with inability to bear weight following hip fracture surgery: An analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Hip fracture procedure targeted database. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 10(2151459319837481)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

40 

Xiang Z, Chen Z, Wang P, Zhang K, Liu F, Zhang C, Wong TM, Li W and Leung F: The effect of early mobilization on functional outcomes after hip surgery in the Chinese population-A multicenter prospective cohort study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 29(23094990211058902)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

41 

Goubar A, Martin FC, Potter C, Jones GD, Sackley C, Ayis S and Sheehan KJ: The 30-day survival and recovery after hip fracture by timing of mobilization and dementia: A UK database study. Bone Joint J. 103-B:1317–1324. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

42 

Manosroi W, Koetsuk L, Phinyo P, Danpanichkul P and Atthakomol P: Predictive model for prolonged length of hospital stay in patients with osteoporotic femoral neck fracture: A 5-year retrospective study. Front Med (Lausanne). 9(1106312)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

43 

Vittinghoff E and McCulloch CE: Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. Am J Epidemiol. 165:710–718. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

44 

Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR and Feinstein AR: A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 49:1373–1379. 1996.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

45 

Sperandei S: Understanding logistic regression analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 24:12–18. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

46 

Bursac Z, Gauss CH, Williams DK and Hosmer DW: Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression. Source Code Biol Med. 3(17)2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

47 

Chowdhury MZI and Turin TC: Variable selection strategies and its importance in clinical prediction modelling. Fam Med Community Health. 8(e000262)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

48 

Munoz-Pichardo JM, Pino-Mejias R, Garcia-Heras J, Ruiz-Munoz F and Luz Gonzalez-Regalado M: A multivariate Poisson regression model for count data. J Appl Stat. 48:2525–2541. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

49 

Charlson ME, Carrozzino D, Guidi J and Patierno C: Charlson comorbidity index: A critical review of clinimetric properties. Psychother Psychosom. 91:8–35. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

50 

Kim JH: Multicollinearity and misleading statistical results. Korean J Anesthesiol. 72:558–569. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

51 

Tomaschek F, Hendrix P and Baayen RH: Strategies for addressing collinearity in multivariate linguistic data. J Phon. 71:249–267. 2018.

52 

Andaloro S, Cacciatore S, Risoli A, Comodo RM, Brancaccio V, Calvani R, Giusti S, Schlögl M, D'Angelo E, Tosato M, et al: Hip fracture as a systemic disease in older adults: A narrative review on multisystem implications and management. Med Sci (Basel). 13(89)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

53 

Hulsbæk S, Larsen RF and Troelsen A: Predictors of not regaining basic mobility after hip fracture surgery. Disabil Rehabil. 37:1739–1744. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

54 

Gray R, Lacey K, Whitehouse C, Dance R and Smith T: What factors affect early mobilisation following hip fracture surgery: A scoping review. BMJ Open Qual. 12 (Suppl 2)(e002281)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

55 

Magaziner J, Chiles N and Orwig D: Recovery after Hip fracture: Interventions and their timing to address deficits and desired outcomes-evidence from the baltimore hip studies. Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser. 83:71–81. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

56 

Monkuntod K, Aree-Ue S and Roopsawang I: Associated factors of functional ability in older persons undergoing hip surgery immediately post-hospital discharge: A prospective study. J Clin Med. 12(6258)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

57 

Istianah U, Nurjannah I and Magetsari R: Post-discharge complications in postoperative patients with hip fracture. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 14:8–13. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

58 

Elli S, Contro D, Castaldi S, Fornili M, Ardoino I, Caserta AV and Panella L: Caregivers' misperception of the severity of hip fractures. Patient Prefer Adherence. 12:1889–1895. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

59 

Yoo JI, Lee YK, Koo KH, Park YJ and Ha YC: Concerns for older adult patients with acute hip fracture. Yonsei Med J. 59:1240–1244. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

60 

Iosifidis M, Iliopoulos E, Panagiotou A, Apostolidis K, Traios S and Giantsis G: Walking ability before and after a hip fracture in elderly predict greater long-term survivorship. J Orthop Sci. 21:48–52. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

61 

Adulkasem N, Phinyo P, Khorana J, Pruksakorn D and Apivatthakakul T: Prognostic factors of 1-year postoperative functional outcomes of older patients with intertrochanteric fractures in Thailand: A retrospective cohort study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 18(6896)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

62 

Kristensen MT: Factors affecting functional prognosis of patients with hip fracture. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 47:257–264. 2011.PubMed/NCBI

63 

Handoll HH, Cameron ID, Mak JC, Panagoda CE and Finnegan TP: Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 11(CD007125)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

64 

Ravi B, Pincus D, Choi S, Jenkinson R, Wasserstein DN and Redelmeier DA: Association of duration of surgery with postoperative delirium among patients receiving hip fracture repair. JAMA Netw Open. 2(e190111)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

65 

Tarrant SM, Attia J and Balogh ZJ: The influence of weight-bearing status on post-operative mobility and outcomes in geriatric hip fracture. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 48:4093–4103. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

66 

Xu BY, Yan S, Low LL, Vasanwala FF and Low SG: Predictors of poor functional outcomes and mortality in patients with hip fracture: A systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 20(568)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

67 

Wong RMY, Qin J, Chau WW, Tang N, Tso CY, Wong HW, Chow SK, Leung KS and Cheung WH: Prognostic factors related to ambulation deterioration after 1-year of geriatric hip fracture in a Chinese population. Sci Rep. 11(14650)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

Related Articles

  • Abstract
  • View
  • Download
  • Twitter
Copy and paste a formatted citation
Spandidos Publications style
Jongutchariya T, Saengsuwan J and Loomcharoen P: Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Biomed Rep 24: 30, 2026.
APA
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., & Loomcharoen, P. (2026). Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Biomedical Reports, 24, 30. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2026.2103
MLA
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., Loomcharoen, P."Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study". Biomedical Reports 24.3 (2026): 30.
Chicago
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., Loomcharoen, P."Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study". Biomedical Reports 24, no. 3 (2026): 30. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2026.2103
Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Jongutchariya T, Saengsuwan J and Loomcharoen P: Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Biomed Rep 24: 30, 2026.
APA
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., & Loomcharoen, P. (2026). Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Biomedical Reports, 24, 30. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2026.2103
MLA
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., Loomcharoen, P."Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study". Biomedical Reports 24.3 (2026): 30.
Chicago
Jongutchariya, T., Saengsuwan, J., Loomcharoen, P."Postoperative prognostic factors for inability to walk at 6 weeks after fragility hip fracture surgery: A retrospective cohort study". Biomedical Reports 24, no. 3 (2026): 30. https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2026.2103
Follow us
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
About
  • Spandidos Publications
  • Careers
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
How can we help?
  • Help
  • Live Chat
  • Contact
  • Email to our Support Team