TABLE 4.

The impact of various social factors and their effect on outcomes

Outcome category	Social theme
	Social support	Socioeconomic status	Living arrangement
Physical functioning	Eight reports investigated how social support affected physical functional outcome. Six found a significant relationship with functioning measures (e.g. activities of daily living, functional questionnaires) (Allegrante et al., 2007; Cobey et al., 1976; Cree et al., 2001; Cresci, 2001; Magaziner et al., 1990; Oh & Feldt, 2000) and 2 did not (Egan et al., 1992; Marottoli et al., 1992).	One report found on socioeconomic status found a significant improvement to functional outcome (Orive et al., 2016).	Two reports did not find a relationship between living arrangement and functional outcomes (Morghen et al., 2011; Sylliaas et al., 2012)
Mortality	One report was found and showed significant positive relationship between lack of social support (i.e. infrequent contact) and mortality (Mortimore et al., 2008).	Four reports (in 3 studies) of a significant positive relationship between socioeconomic status and mortality, with lower socioeconomic markers predicting increased mortality post hip fracture (Kristensen et al., 2017; Shin et al., 2016; Thorne et al., 2016).	One report found a significant positive relationship between living arrangement (i.e. institutionalisation) and mortality (Hongisto et al., 2016).
Other outcomes	Three reports found a significant relationship between a social intervention (counselling) and health-related quality of life (Gambatesa et al., 2013), between social isolation and delay in hospital discharge (Landeiro et al., 2016) and between being married and institutionalisation post hip fracture (Marottoli et al., 1994).	One study found that patients with both high education and high income had a lower risk of acute readmission (Kristensen et al., 2017).	Two reports found a significant positive relationship for living arrangement with pain (Orive et al., 2016) and institutionalisation (Hongisto et al., 2016).