Abstract
Choice of implant for patients aged sixty-five years or younger requiring hip arthroplasty is a topic of current debate, those in favor of resurfacing maintain it offers a greater range of motion and activity. We examined the Oxford Hip Score's (OHS) and Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) of patients undergoing either total hip replacement (THR) using an Elite Plus Stem, or hip resurfacing using a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR).
The THR cohort comprised 34 implants (4 bilateral), 17 men, 17 women, mean age 56.08 years. The resurfacing cohort comprised 27 implants (3 bilateral), 18 men, 9 women, mean age 50.51 years. The mean difference calculated between pre- and post-operative OHS was 22.08 and 25.33 for the THR and resurfacing cohorts respectively. The mean Duke score was 42.3 and 53 for the cohorts respectively.
Using the pre-operative and post-operative change in Oxford Hip Scores, no statistically significant difference was found between the THR and resurfacing cohorts (p = 0.2891). There was a statistically difference found between the THR and resurfacing cohorts with regards to activity using post-operative Duke scores, (p = 0.0047).
This study has emphasized the use of the DASI, a pure activity score, in hip research. In terms of reducing pain, both prostheses appear equally effective. With regards to activity, as evidenced by utilizing a pure activity score, the resurfacing cohort faired better. Our study suggests at one year post-op, young patients with a resurfacing have a greater activity level than those with a THR.
