The primary aim of our study was to assess the influence of age on hip-specific outcome following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aims were to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and level of activity according to age. A prospective cohort study was conducted. All patients were fitted with an Exeter stem with a 32 mm head on highly cross-linked polyethylene (X3RimFit) cemented acetabulum. Patients were recruited into three age groups: < 65 years, 65 to 74 years, and ≥ 75 years, and assessed preoperatively and at three, 12, 24, and 60 months postoperatively. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), were used to assess hip-specific outcome. EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) scores were used to assess HRQoL. The Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) and Timed Up and Go (TUG) were used to assess level of activity.Aims
Methods
This study uses prospective registry data to compare early patient outcomes following arthroscopic repair or debridement of the acetabular labrum. Data on adult patients who underwent arthroscopic labral debridement or repair between 1 January 2012 and 31 July 2019 were extracted from the UK Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry. Patients who underwent microfracture, osteophyte excision, or a concurrent extra-articular procedure were excluded. The EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) and International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12) questionnaires were collected preoperatively and at six and 12 months post-operatively. Due to concerns over differential questionnaire non-response between the two groups, a combination of random sampling, propensity score matching, and pooled multivariable linear regression models were employed to compare iHOT-12 improvement.Aims
Methods
The rate of dislocation when traditional single bearing implants are used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been reported to be between 8% and 10%. The use of dual mobility bearings can reduce this risk to between 0.5% and 2%. Dual mobility bearings are more expensive, and it is not clear if the additional clinical benefits constitute value for money for the payers. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dual mobility compared with single bearings for patients undergoing revision THA. We developed a Markov model to estimate the expected cost and benefits of dual mobility compared with single bearing implants in patients undergoing revision THA. The rates of revision and further revision were calculated from the National Joint Registry of England and Wales, while rates of transition from one health state to another were estimated from the literature, and the data were stratified by sex and age. Implant and healthcare costs were estimated from local procurement prices and national tariffs. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated using published utility estimates for patients undergoing THA.Aims
Methods
