Hip FracturesSTRATIFYNCT06014554
Structured Tailored Rehabilitation After Hip Fragility Fracture
A study testing Low-risk subgroup, Medium-risk subgroup and High-risk subgroup in people with Hip Fractures, run by King's College London at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
Why the investigators are doing this study? The best approach to rehabilitation after a broken hip is not known. A new approach could improve outcomes by tailoring rehabilitation to patient needs. This approach identifies subgroups of patients within a population who have different risks of poor outcomes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 60 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Hip Fractures
- What is being tested?
- Low-risk subgroup, Medium-risk subgroup and High-risk subgroup
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 15 Apr 2024to 1 Jun 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 60 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- aged 60 years or more.
- admitted to hospital for surgical repair of a hip fracture.
- who are willing and able to provide consent or assent depending on the level of cognitive impairment.
Who cannot join
- less than 60 years, to align with the National Hip Fracture Databases definition of the target population.
- not surgically treated, as this treatment approach is reserved for around 2% of patients in the UK who are often at the end of life.
- who broke their hip in hospital following admission for a different illness/injury as their anticipated care pathway and outcomes will vary from those who are admitted for hip fracture.
- participating in other treatment trials and without agreement of both trial teams.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
St Thomas Hospital
London
Rebecca Edwards
About this study
Official title: Structured Tailored Rehabilitation After Hip Fragility Fracture: The 'STRATIFY' Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial
Why the investigators are doing this study? The best approach to rehabilitation after a broken hip is not known. A new approach could improve outcomes by tailoring rehabilitation to patient needs. This approach identifies subgroups of patients within a population who have different risks of poor outcomes. These subgroups are then matched to treatments better tailored to their needs. Survivors of a broken hip describe a tailored approach as key to recovery. Further, the NHS recommends this approach as central to healthcare progress.
This study wants to see if it is possible for the NHS to deliver this new approach to rehabilitation for older adults who break their hip.
Read more
What will be done? The investigators worked with patients to plan this study. Patients will keep helping the investigators during the study. Sixty older people who had surgery to fix a broken hip will be invited to take part. Participants will be given a level of risk (low, medium, or high) based on an online calculator (www.stratifyhip.co.uk).
All 60 participants will get usual care provided locally. Half, selected by chance, will get extra rehabilitation during their hospital stay including a self-managed exercise programme for the low-risk subgroup, education, a goal-orientated mobility programme and enhanced discharge planning for the medium-risk subgroup, and education, a goal-orientated activity of daily living programme, orientation, and enhanced assessment for the high-risk subgroup.
The investigators will collect information from the 60 people taking part, at the beginning, middle, and end of the study and again 12- weeks later.
What will the next step be? If this small study shows this extra rehabilitation can be provided in the NHS, and it may help patients, then the investigators plan to do a larger study. The larger study will see if this extra rehabilitation works to help older people get back home and feel happier.
Read the detailed description
Each year, United Kingdom (UK) hospitals admit 70,000 men and women over the age of 60 years with hip fracture. Even with surgery, 30% of patients die within a year. Among survivors, 25% never walk again, and 22% transition from independent living to nursing homes. This led 81 global societies to endorse a call to action to improve acute multidisciplinary care after hip fracture.
A recent Cochrane systematic review supports rehabilitation in hospital as an effective approach to reduce mortality after hip fracture. However, the nature of the rehabilitation interventions varied considerably limiting conclusions on the optimal components. This uncertainty has translated to NICE guidance being limited to daily mobilisation and regular physiotherapy review.
The generalisability of the evidence is also limited as many rehabilitation trials attempted to account for differences in the hip fracture population by targeting homogenous subgroups such as patients with cognitive impairment, women, or from nursing homes. It is therefore uncertain whether interventions deemed 'effective' are so for all patients, or for the targeted subgroup. This in turn poses challenges as to how these interventions may be implemented when subgroups compete for finite National Health Service (NHS) resources.
An intervention based on stratified rehabilitation may provide answers to these uncertainties. Stratified rehabilitation considers an entire population competing for resources to identify subgroups of patients with different risk of poor outcomes. Subgroups are then matched to rehabilitation tailored to their needs to optimise outcomes across the entire population. Hip fracture survivors recently described this tailored approach as key to successful recovery. Further, a stratified approach is regarded central to the progress of healthcare according to the NHS and House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Although an approach of matching rehabilitation to patient subgroups with different risks of poor outcomes is intuitive and effective for other conditions, it has not been tested for rehabilitation after hip fracture.
A stratified approach to rehabilitation after hip fracture was subsequently developed. The study has been designed in collaboration with patients and carers, healthcare professionals working in the hospital setting, health services researchers and statisticians. The protocol has been scientifically appraised through the funding application process (with external peer review) and by experts in the field of orthogeriatric rehabilitation research.
First, the investigators developed and validated a subgrouping tool 'the stratify hip algorithm' (based on three multivariable prediction models) to identify patients at low-, intermediate- and high-risk of death and/or change in residence (to a higher level of care) using records for over 170,000 patients admitted to one of 173 hospitals in England and Wales. The approach requires website entry of 5 pieces of information (age, sex, prefracture mobility, prefracture residence, and dementia diagnosis) to generate a risk assignment.
Next matched interventions were designed for each subgroup identified by the algorithm. These interventions were informed by qualitative interviews with patients, physiotherapists, and the multidisciplinary team, an umbrella review of systematic reviews of older adults who underwent rehabilitation interventions in the acute setting, recent systematic (including Cochrane) reviews, international guidelines, consultation with our public and patient involvement group 'TROOP' (further detail of TROOP available at www.ppitroop.co.uk), and an intervention development workshop and survey (following a nominal group technique) to prioritize components with key stakeholders. The interventions comprise self-managed exercise (low risk subgroup); education, a goal orientated mobility programme, and enhanced discharge planning (medium risk subgroup); and education, a goal orientated activities of daily living programme, and enhanced assessment (high risk subgroup). Carers of participants in the medium and high risk subgroups will be invited to take part to receive training in supporting participants with their programmes.
The overarching purpose of a future main study is to determine the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of adding an intervention to usual care designed to improve outcomes of acute care for older adults after hip fracture. Several uncertainties will first be addressed through this randomised feasibility trial.
The primary objective of this feasibility and pilot randomised trial is to determine the treatment fidelity of the proposed intervention.
Secondary objectives seek to determine:
- The acceptability of the intervention to participants, carers and therapists.
- Barriers and enablers to intervention delivery.
- Count of screened, eligible, approached, recruited and retained participants (and carers).
- Acceptability, completeness, and descriptive comparison of outcome data collection.
- Count of inadvertent unblinding of outcome assessors.
- Count of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE).
- Indicative sample size for a definitive trial.
Sixty participants will be recruited (30 per treatment arm) with assessments at baseline, intervention end, and 12-week follow up. The intervention will start within 72 hours of surgery and end on discharge from the acute hospital. Feasibility criteria have been specified a priori to determine whether the trial will progress to a definitive trial.
- Conditions
- Hip Fractures
- Being tested
- Low-risk subgroup, Medium-risk subgroup, High-risk subgroup, Control group
- Keywords
- neck of femur, fragility fracture, rehabilitation, stratified care
- Medical subject headings
- Hip Fractures
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Low-risk subgroupOther
Self-managed exercise programme.
Medium-risk subgroupOther
Education, goal-orientated mobility programme, and enhanced discharge planning.
High-risk subgroupOther
Education, enhanced assessment, orientation, and goal-orientated activities of daily living training programme.
Control groupOther
Usual care entails physiotherapy and occupational therapy from the day after surgery to the point of discharge, with a focus on discharge planning and sufficient recovery of activities of daily living and mobility for safe return to prefracture residence.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Stratify | Experimental | Patients randomised to the 'Stratify' intervention will receive usual care and an intervention based on their subgroup assignment. The intervention will start before the third postoperative day and be delivered during the inpatient stay. Intervention components will be delivered by a physiotherapist, occupational therapist, or therapy assistant depending on staffing availability. Receives: Other: Low-risk subgroup; Other: Medium-risk subgroup; Other: High-risk subgroup |
| Usual care | Placebo comparator | Patients randomised to the control arm will receive usual physiotherapy and occupational therapy care. Receives: Other: Control group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Treatment fidelity (supervised intervention)
measured through assessment of treatment logs
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Treatment fidelity (unsupervised intervention)
measured through assessment of patient diary
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Secondary outcomes (17)
Count of screened, eligibly, approached, recruited and retained participants
Measured: screening through to 12-week follow-up
Acceptability of intervention to participants, carers and therapists
collected via semi-structured interviews
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Barriers and enablers to intervention delivery
collected via semi-structured interviews with participants, carers and therapists
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Acceptability and completeness of EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L
health-related quality of life
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Barthel Index
activities of daily living
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living
activities of daily living
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Short Falls Efficacy Scale-International
falls related self-efficacy
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Numeric Rating Scale
Pain
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of New Mobility Score
Walking ability
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of University of Alabama Life Space Assessment
Walking ability
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of non-validated resource use questionnaire
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Length of stay
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Completeness of Mortality
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Living status
lives alone, with independent spouse, with dependent spouse, with family, with other
Measured: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Readmission
Readmission to hospital (for any cause) following discharge after hip fracture surgery. The cause of readmission will be documented.
Measured: 12-week follow-up
Count of inadvertent unblinding of outcome assessors
Measured: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Count of adverse and serious adverse events
Measured: From randomisation to 12-week follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Aug 2023
- Study start15 Apr 2024
- Primary completion30 Jan 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jun 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Hip FracturesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by King's College LondonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- King's College London
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- UK Research and Innovation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06014554
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 312631
- Acronym
- STRATIFY
- Status last verified
- Jul 2024
- First submitted
- 18 Aug 2023
- Last updated
- 29 Jul 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: An anonymised dataset will be preserved on the King's Open Research Data System. This dataset will include anonymised data collected which does not breach any agreement for outcome measure use.
Publications
Sheehan KJ, Guerra S, Ayis S, Goubar A, Foster NE, Martin FC, Godfrey E, Cameron ID, Gregson CL, Walsh NE, Ferguson Montague A, Edwards R, Adams J, Jones GD, Gibson J, Sackley C, Whitney J. Structured tailored rehabilitation after hip fragility fracture: The 'Stratify' feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial protocol. PLoS One. 2024 Dec 17;19(12):e0306870. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306870. eCollection 2024.
PubMed 39689129
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Jul 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Structured Tailored Rehabilitation After Hip Fragility Fracture: The 'STRATIFY' Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06014554
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STRATIFY / 312631
- Conditions
- Hip Fractures
- Keywords
- neck of femur, fragility fracture, rehabilitation, stratified care
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- King's College LondonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- UK Research and Innovation
- Study start
- 15 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jan 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jun 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 28 Aug 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Why the investigators are doing this study? The best approach to rehabilitation after a broken hip is not known. A new approach could improve outcomes by tailoring rehabilitation to patient needs. This approach identifies subgroups of patients within a population who have different risks of poor outcomes. These subgroups are then matched to treatments better tailored to their needs. Survivors of a broken hip describe a tailored approach as key to recovery. Further, the NHS recommends this approach as central to healthcare progress.
This study wants to see if it is possible for the NHS to deliver this new approach to rehabilitation for older adults who break their hip.
What will be done? The investigators worked with patients to plan this study. Patients will keep helping the investigators during the study. Sixty older people who had surgery to fix a broken hip will be invited to take part. Participants will be given a level of risk (low, medium, or high) based on an online calculator (www.stratifyhip.co.uk).
All 60 participants will get usual care provided locally. Half, selected by chance, will get extra rehabilitation during their hospital stay including a self-managed exercise programme for the low-risk subgroup, education, a goal-orientated mobility programme and enhanced discharge planning for the medium-risk subgroup, and education, a goal-orientated activity of daily living programme, orientation, and enhanced assessment for the high-risk subgroup.
The investigators will collect information from the 60 people taking part, at the beginning, middle, and end of the study and again 12- weeks later.
What will the next step be? If this small study shows this extra rehabilitation can be provided in the NHS, and it may help patients, then the investigators plan to do a larger study. The larger study will see if this extra rehabilitation works to help older people get back home and feel happier.
Detailed description
Each year, United Kingdom (UK) hospitals admit 70,000 men and women over the age of 60 years with hip fracture. Even with surgery, 30% of patients die within a year. Among survivors, 25% never walk again, and 22% transition from independent living to nursing homes. This led 81 global societies to endorse a call to action to improve acute multidisciplinary care after hip fracture.
A recent Cochrane systematic review supports rehabilitation in hospital as an effective approach to reduce mortality after hip fracture. However, the nature of the rehabilitation interventions varied considerably limiting conclusions on the optimal components. This uncertainty has translated to NICE guidance being limited to daily mobilisation and regular physiotherapy review.
The generalisability of the evidence is also limited as many rehabilitation trials attempted to account for differences in the hip fracture population by targeting homogenous subgroups such as patients with cognitive impairment, women, or from nursing homes. It is therefore uncertain whether interventions deemed 'effective' are so for all patients, or for the targeted subgroup. This in turn poses challenges as to how these interventions may be implemented when subgroups compete for finite National Health Service (NHS) resources.
An intervention based on stratified rehabilitation may provide answers to these uncertainties. Stratified rehabilitation considers an entire population competing for resources to identify subgroups of patients with different risk of poor outcomes. Subgroups are then matched to rehabilitation tailored to their needs to optimise outcomes across the entire population. Hip fracture survivors recently described this tailored approach as key to successful recovery. Further, a stratified approach is regarded central to the progress of healthcare according to the NHS and House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. Although an approach of matching rehabilitation to patient subgroups with different risks of poor outcomes is intuitive and effective for other conditions, it has not been tested for rehabilitation after hip fracture.
A stratified approach to rehabilitation after hip fracture was subsequently developed. The study has been designed in collaboration with patients and carers, healthcare professionals working in the hospital setting, health services researchers and statisticians. The protocol has been scientifically appraised through the funding application process (with external peer review) and by experts in the field of orthogeriatric rehabilitation research.
First, the investigators developed and validated a subgrouping tool 'the stratify hip algorithm' (based on three multivariable prediction models) to identify patients at low-, intermediate- and high-risk of death and/or change in residence (to a higher level of care) using records for over 170,000 patients admitted to one of 173 hospitals in England and Wales. The approach requires website entry of 5 pieces of information (age, sex, prefracture mobility, prefracture residence, and dementia diagnosis) to generate a risk assignment.
Next matched interventions were designed for each subgroup identified by the algorithm. These interventions were informed by qualitative interviews with patients, physiotherapists, and the multidisciplinary team, an umbrella review of systematic reviews of older adults who underwent rehabilitation interventions in the acute setting, recent systematic (including Cochrane) reviews, international guidelines, consultation with our public and patient involvement group 'TROOP' (further detail of TROOP available at www.ppitroop.co.uk), and an intervention development workshop and survey (following a nominal group technique) to prioritize components with key stakeholders. The interventions comprise self-managed exercise (low risk subgroup); education, a goal orientated mobility programme, and enhanced discharge planning (medium risk subgroup); and education, a goal orientated activities of daily living programme, and enhanced assessment (high risk subgroup). Carers of participants in the medium and high risk subgroups will be invited to take part to receive training in supporting participants with their programmes.
The overarching purpose of a future main study is to determine the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of adding an intervention to usual care designed to improve outcomes of acute care for older adults after hip fracture. Several uncertainties will first be addressed through this randomised feasibility trial.
The primary objective of this feasibility and pilot randomised trial is to determine the treatment fidelity of the proposed intervention.
Secondary objectives seek to determine:
- The acceptability of the intervention to participants, carers and therapists.
- Barriers and enablers to intervention delivery.
- Count of screened, eligible, approached, recruited and retained participants (and carers).
- Acceptability, completeness, and descriptive comparison of outcome data collection.
- Count of inadvertent unblinding of outcome assessors.
- Count of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE).
- Indicative sample size for a definitive trial.
Sixty participants will be recruited (30 per treatment arm) with assessments at baseline, intervention end, and 12-week follow up. The intervention will start within 72 hours of surgery and end on discharge from the acute hospital. Feasibility criteria have been specified a priori to determine whether the trial will progress to a definitive trial.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Stratify | Experimental | Other: Low-risk subgroup, Other: Medium-risk subgroup, Other: High-risk subgroupPatients randomised to the 'Stratify' intervention will receive usual care and an intervention based on their subgroup assignment. The intervention will start before the third postoperative day and be delivered during the inpatient stay. Intervention components will be delivered by a physiotherapist, occupational therapist, or therapy assistant depending on staffing availability. |
| Usual care | Placebo comparator | Other: Control groupPatients randomised to the control arm will receive usual physiotherapy and occupational therapy care. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 60 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- aged 60 years or more.
- admitted to hospital for surgical repair of a hip fracture.
- who are willing and able to provide consent or assent depending on the level of cognitive impairment.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- less than 60 years, to align with the National Hip Fracture Databases definition of the target population.
- not surgically treated, as this treatment approach is reserved for around 2% of patients in the UK who are often at the end of life.
- who broke their hip in hospital following admission for a different illness/injury as their anticipated care pathway and outcomes will vary from those who are admitted for hip fracture.
- participating in other treatment trials and without agreement of both trial teams.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Low-risk subgroupSelf-managed exercise programme. | Other | Stratify |
| Medium-risk subgroupEducation, goal-orientated mobility programme, and enhanced discharge planning. | Other | Stratify |
| High-risk subgroupEducation, enhanced assessment, orientation, and goal-orientated activities of daily living training programme. | Other | Stratify |
| Control groupUsual care entails physiotherapy and occupational therapy from the day after surgery to the point of discharge, with a focus on discharge planning and sufficient recovery of activities of daily living and mobility for safe return to prefracture residence. | Other | Usual care |
Primary outcome
Treatment fidelity (supervised intervention)
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
measured through assessment of treatment logs
Treatment fidelity (unsupervised intervention)
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
measured through assessment of patient diary
17 secondary outcomes
Count of screened, eligibly, approached, recruited and retained participants
Time frame: screening through to 12-week follow-up
Acceptability of intervention to participants, carers and therapists
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Barriers and enablers to intervention delivery
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Acceptability and completeness of EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Barthel Index
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Short Falls Efficacy Scale-International
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of New Mobility Score
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of University of Alabama Life Space Assessment
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Acceptability and completeness of non-validated resource use questionnaire
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Length of stay
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)
Completeness of Mortality
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Living status
Time frame: Baseline, at the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Completeness of Readmission
Time frame: 12-week follow-up
Count of inadvertent unblinding of outcome assessors
Time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days), and 12-week follow-up
Count of adverse and serious adverse events
Time frame: From randomisation to 12-week follow-up
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Jul 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39689129Sheehan KJ, Guerra S, Ayis S, Goubar A, Foster NE, Martin FC, Godfrey E, Cameron ID, Gregson CL, Walsh NE, Ferguson Montague A, Edwards R, Adams J, Jones GD, Gibson J, Sackley C, Whitney J. Structured tailored rehabilitation after hip fragility fracture: The 'Stratify' feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial protocol. PLoS One. 2024 Dec 17;19(12):e0306870. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306870. eCollection 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. An anonymised dataset will be preserved on the King's Open Research Data System. This dataset will include anonymised data collected which does not breach any agreement for outcome measure use.
Related trials for Hip Fractures
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Effect of Ondansetron on the Incidence of Spinal Anaesthesia-Induced Hypotension in Elderly Patients Undergoing Fracture Hip Surgery
Spinal Anaesthesia Induced Hypotension
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus PENG Block for Hip Fracture Surgery
Femur Neck Fracture, Hip Fractures
Active, not recruiting
Lumbar-Sacral Plexus Block vs Fascia Iliaca Block Plus Low-Dose Spinal Anesthesia for Femoral Neck Fracture Surgery
Femoral Neck Fractures, Nerve Block
RecruitingObservational study
Real World Evidence of SI-BONE's iFuse TORQ TNT Advancing Treatment of Pelvic Ring Fractures
Fracture; Pelvic, Insufficiency Fractures
Not yet recruiting
A Decision Support Tool for Common Surgical Fixations of Hip Fractures
Hip Fracture Surgeries, High Risk Population of Hip Fractures
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Low-risk subgroup, Medium-risk subgroup and High-risk subgroup in people with Hip Fractures, run by King's College London at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Jul 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Katie J Sheehan, PhD (+44 (0)20 7123 4843, katie.sheehan@kcl.ac.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Treatment fidelity (supervised intervention) (time frame: At the end of the intervention when the participant is discharged from the ward (average length of inpatient stay is 16 days)). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06014554, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Jul 2024.