IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233690.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prognostic factors and quality of life after pelvic fractures. The Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance (BIOS) study

Author

Listed:
  • L Brouwers
  • M A C de Jongh
  • L de Munter
  • M Edwards
  • K W W Lansink

Abstract

Introduction: Pelvic fractures can have long-term consequences for health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The main purpose of this study is to provide insight into short-term HRQoL in the first year after pelvic injury and to identify short-term prognostic factors of decreased outcome. Methods: This is a prospective, observational, multicenter, follow-up cohort study in which HRQoL and functional outcomes were assessed during 12-month follow-up of injured adult patients admitted to 1 of 10 hospitals in the county of Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands. The data were collected by self-reported questionnaires at 1 week (including preinjury assessment) and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after injury. The EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), visual analog scale (VAS), Merle d’Aubigné Hip Score (MAHS) and Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS) were used. Multivariable mixed models were used to examine the course of the HRQoL and the prognostic factors for decreased HRQoL and functional outcomes over time. Results: A total of 184 patients with pelvic fractures were identified between September 2015–September 2016; the fractures included 71 Tile A, 44 Tile B and 10 Tile C fractures and 59 acetabular fractures. At the pre-injury, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after injury time points, the mean EQ-5D Index values were 0.90, 0.26, 0.45, 0.66, 0.77 and 0.80, respectively, and the mean EQ-VAS values were 83, 45, 57, 69, 75 and 75, respectively. At 6 and 12 months after injury, 22 and 25% of the MPS

Suggested Citation

  • L Brouwers & M A C de Jongh & L de Munter & M Edwards & K W W Lansink, 2020. "Prognostic factors and quality of life after pelvic fractures. The Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance (BIOS) study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233690
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233690
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233690&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233690?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233690. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.