Evidence Hub

Hip Fragility Fractures: One Or Two Pathologies? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Demographic, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Aspects

Dinamarca-Montecinos JL, Yáñez M, Aguilera A, Minonzio JG

Aging and disease, 2025

Abstract

There is evidence that hip fragility fractures (HFF) are at least two different types of disease: intra- and extracapsular fractures (ICF and ECF). However, they are still mainly considered as one entity. Differentiating them may provide clues to improve their prevention, treatments and prognosis, and to reduce clinical, organisational and economic impacts. This work addressed published evidence about differences between ICF and ECF in older people, comparing demographic, etiologic, and therapeutic aspects, producing a summary of the state of the art, and determining which variables are associated with significant differences. A systematic review based on PRISMA methodology was conducted, searching in Google Scholar, Springer and Scopus from 01.01.1980 to 01.03.2024. Publications with p-values obtained from quantitative tests (p 50% of the studies. Surgical management was significantly different in all studies. Significant demographic, diagnostic and therapeutic differences exist between ICF and ECF. There is a lack of studies combining variables, especially haematological exams.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free