Sensitivity analyses were also performed for patients classified

Sensitivity analyses were also performed for patients classified according to their risk of malnutrition at baseline,

as measured by the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). The MNA was developed for elderly people and includes 18 items grouped in four categories: anthropometric assessment (including BMI, weight PI3K Inhibitor Library ic50 loss, arm circumference and calf circumference); general assessment of lifestyle, medication use, mobility, presence of signs of depression or dementia); short dietary assessment (number of meals, food and fluid intake, autonomy of feeding) and subjective assessment (self perception of health and nutrition) [40, 41]. A score of ≥24 indicates no malnutrition; a score between 17 and 23.5 indicates being at risk of malnutrition, and a score less than 17 indicates malnutrition. For this purpose, the group malnutrition 4EGI-1 research buy and the group at risk of malnutrition are combined and compared with the group no malnutrition. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed using SPSS version 15 and Excel 2003 and based on the intention-to-treat principle. Missing values for the EuroQoL at 6 months postoperatively were imputed by last observation carried forward. If volume date were missing to calculate the costs, these missing data were replaced by individual means

of valid volume data before multiplying the volumes by the cost prices. Costs were presented as means and standard deviations, and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to test for significant differences in costs between the intervention and control group. The robustness of the cost analyses was also tested by Dinaciclib chemical structure bootstrapping (1,000×). Furthermore, bootstrapping (5,000×) was used to calculate the uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness ratios, and CEPs and CEACs were plotted [29, 36–38]. Sensitivity analyses were performed for age categories (55–74 vs. ≥75 years)

4��8C and for the risk of malnutrition at baseline (at risk of malnutrition and malnutrition vs. no malnutrition). Bootstrapping was also used to calculate the uncertainty around the ICERs resulting from the sensitivity analyses, and CEPs and CEACs were also plotted. Results From July 2007 until December 2009, a total of 1,304 hip fracture patients were admitted to the surgical and orthopedic wards of the participating hospitals and screened for eligibility. Of the screened patients, 895 (69%) did not meet the inclusion criteria, mainly due to cognitive impairment (52%). Two-hundred fifty-seven (20%) patients refused to participate. Of the resulting 152 patients who gave informed consent, 73 were randomly allocated to the intervention group and 79 to the control group. During the 3-month intervention period, seven patients (four, intervention; three, control) passed away, and seven patients (three, intervention; four, control) withdrew their participation, resulting in 138 assessable patients (68 intervention, 72 control) at 3 months.

Comments are closed.