A national screening programme has existed in the UK for the diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) since 1969. However, every aspect of screening and treatment remains controversial. Screening programmes throughout the world vary enormously, and in the UK there is significant variation in screening practice and treatment pathways. We report the results of an attempt by the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery (BSCOS) to identify a nationwide consensus for the management of DDH in order to unify treatment and suggest an approach for screening. A Delphi consensus study was performed among the membership of BSCOS. Statements were generated by a steering group regarding aspects of the management of DDH in children aged under three months, namely screening and surveillance (15 questions), the technique of ultrasound scanning (eight questions), the initiation of treatment (19 questions), care during treatment with a splint (ten questions), and on quality, governance, and research (eight questions). A two-round Delphi process was used and a consensus document was produced at the final meeting of the steering group.Aims
Methods
The primary aims of this study were to determine the time to sonographic correction of decentred hips during treatment with Pavlik harness for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and investigate potential risk factors for a delayed response to treatment. This was a retrospective cohort study of infants with decentred hips who underwent a comprehensive management protocol with Pavlik harness between 2012 and 2016. Ultrasound assessments were performed at standardized intervals and time to correction from centring of the femoral head was quantified. Hips with < 40% femoral head coverage (FHC) were considered decentred, and hips with > 50% FHC and α angles > 60° were considered corrected. Survival analyses using log-rank tests and Cox regression were performed to investigate potential risk factors for delayed time to correction.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without. Data were collected from participants and medical records for the 12 months prior to revision. Patients with previous revision, metal-on-metal articulations, or hip hemiarthroplasty were excluded. Participants were retrospectively classified as ‘Planned’ or ‘Unplanned’ revision. Multilevel regression and propensity score matching were used to compare the two groups.Aims
Methods
