IntroductionSeveral prognostic models have been developed for mortality in hip fracture patients, but their accuracy for long-term prediction is unclear. This study evaluates the performance of three models assessing 30-day, 1-year and 8-year mortality after hip fracture surgery: the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS), the model developed by Holt et al. and the Hip fracture Estimator of Mortality Amsterdam (HEMA).Materials and methodsPatients admitted with a fractured hip between January 2012 and June 2013 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Relevant variables used by the three models were collected, as were mortality data. Predictive performance was assessed in terms of discrimination with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and calibration with the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. Clinical usefulness was evaluated by determining risk groups for each model, comparing differences in mortality using Kaplan–Meier curves, and by assessing positive and negative predictive values.ResultsA total of 344 patients were included for analysis. Observed mortality rates were 6.1% after 30 days, 19.1% after 1 year and 68.6% after 8 years. The NHFS and the model by Holt et al. demonstrated good to excellent discrimination and adequate calibration for both short- and long-term mortality prediction, with similar clinical usefulness measures. The HEMA demonstrated inferior prediction of 30-day and 8-year mortality, with worse discriminative abilities and a significant lack of fit.ConclusionsThe NHFS and the model by Holt et al. allowed for accurate identification of low- and high-risk patients for both short- and long-term mortality after a fracture of the hip. The HEMA performed poorly. When considering predictive performance and ease of use, the NHFS seems most suitable for implementation in daily clinical practice.