Background: Whether reducing time-to-surgery for elderly patients suffering from hip fracture results in better outcomes remains subject to controversial debates.

Background: Foot drop can be caused by a variety of diseases and injuries. Although it is a common condition, its overall incidence has not been reported to date. Foot drop markedly restricts the everyday activities of persons suffering from it. There is, therefore, a need for an optimized strategy for its diagnosis and treatment that would be standardized across the medical specialties encountering patients with this problem.Methods: This article consists of a review on the basis of pertinent publications retrieved by a search in the Pubmed/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases, as well as a description of the authors' proposed strategy for the diagnosis and treatment of foot drop.Results: Foot drop can be due to a disturbance at any central or peripheral location along the motor neural pathway that terminates in the dorsiflexor muscles of the foot, or at multiple locations in series. Optimal localization of the lesion(s) is a prerequisite for appropriate treatment and a successful outcome. The most common causes are L5 radiculopathy and peroneal nerve injury. An operation by a neurosurgeon or spinal surgeon is a reasonable option whenever there is a realistic chance that the nerve will recover. In our opinion, any patient with a subjectively disturbing foot drop and a clinically suspected compressive neuropathy of the peroneal nerve should be informed about the option of surgical decompression of the nerve at the fibular head, which can be performed with little risk. In case of a permanent foot drop, some patients can benefit from muscle-transfer surgery. For spastic foot drop, the option of botulinum toxin injections should be evaluated. Conclusion:The care of patients with foot drop could be optimized by interdisciplinary foot-drop clinics involving all of the relevant specialists. The goals of treatment should always be improved mobility in everyday life and the prevention of falls, pain, and abnormal postures.

BackgroundDistal radius and proximal femoral fractures are typical injuries in later life, predominantly due to simple falls, but modulated by other relevant factors such as osteoporosis. Fracture incidence rates rise with age. Because of the growing proportion of elderly people in Western industrialized societies, the number of these fractures can be expected to increase further in the coming years, and with it the burden on healthcare resources. Our study therefore assessed the effects of these injuries on the health status of older people over time. The purpose of this paper is to describe the study method, clinical parameters of fracture patients during hospitalization, mortality up to one and a half years after discharge in relation to various factors such as type of fracture, and to describe changes in mobility and living situation.MethodsData were collected from all consecutive patients (no age limit) admitted to 423 hospitals throughout Germany with distal radius or femoral fractures (57% acute-care, femoral and forearm fractures; 43% rehabilitation, femoral fractures only) between January 2002 and September 2003. Polytrauma and coma patients were excluded. Demographic characteristics, exact fracture location, mobility and living situation, clinical and laboratory parameters were examined. Current health status was assessed in telephone interviews conducted on average 6–7 months after discharge. Where telephone contact could not be established, at least survival status (living/deceased/date of death) was determined.ResultsThe study population consisted of 12,520 femoral fracture patients (86.8% hip fractures), average age 77.5 years, 76.5% female, and 2,031 forearm fracture patients, average age 67.6 years, 81.6% female. Women's average age was 6.6 (femoral fracture) to 10 years (forearm fracture) older than men's (p < 0.0001). Only 4.6% of femoral fracture patients experienced changes in their living situation post-discharge (53% because of the fracture event), although less than half of subjects who were able to walk without assistive devices prior to the fracture event (76.7%) could still do so at time of interview (34.9%). At time of interview, 1.5% of subjects were bed-ridden (0.2% before fracture). Forearm fracture patients reported no change in living situation at all. Of the femoral fracture patients 119 (0.95%), and of the forearm fracture patients 3 (0.15%) died during hospital stay. Post-discharge (follow-up one and a half years) 1,463 femoral fracture patients died (19.2% acute-care patients, 8.5% rehabilitation patients), but only 60 forearm fracture patients (3.0%). Ninety percent of femoral fracture deaths happened within the first year, approximately 66% within the first 6 months. More acute-care patients with a pertrochanteric fracture died within one year post-discharge (20.6%) than patients with a cervical fracture (16.1%).ConclusionMortality after proximal femoral fracture is still alarmingly high and highest after pertrochanteric fracture. Although at time of interview more than half ...