Purpose of study. Results clinically & statistically of a 10 year prospective observational longitudinal study of the effects of sonographic screening for ‘risk’ factors in DDH. Methods & Results. From 1997 to 2006 the project analysed the results of a sonographic screening programme for clinical instability & ‘risk factors’ in Blackburn (modified Graf system). ‘Risk factors’ included: breech presentation, strong family history, foot deformities & oligohydramnios. Statistically 95% confidence intervals, relative risk, sensitivity, specificity PPV & NPV were calculated. The outcome measure was irreducible dislocation of the hip joint. There was a birth population of 37,510, of which 2693 were ‘at risk’ & 132 clinically unstable. Three subsections:. 1. Clinically unstable hips (birth). 2 irreducible dislocations. 2. ‘At risk’. 6 irreducible dislocations. 3. Secondary referral (GP screening). 11 irreducible dislocations. The overall irreducible dislocation rate was 0.51 per 1000 live births. ‘Risk factors’: mGraf Type III/IV/ Irreducible:. CTCV:. 1: 13.8. RR = 26.5. Family history:. 1:18.5. RR = 23.3. Breech:. 1:35. RR = 14.8. Oligohydramnios. 1:99.5. TEV (postural). 1:202. CTEV (fixed). 0.0. Narrow 95% CI for Breech, CTCV & CTEV. Wide 95% CI for Family history, oligohydramnios & TEV (postural). 95% CI (RR) for Oligohydramnios & TEV not significant. RR for clinical hip instability was 983.6. Percentage female. 18/19 irreducible hips. 94.74%. 64/92 Type IV hips. 69.56%. 26/30 Type III hips. 86.66%. 34.15% of clinically unstable hip joints had a ‘risk factor’. Conclusion. Only 13 from 2693 ‘at risk’, had Type IV or Irreducible hips. Only 7 were treatable by splintage. Clinically & statistically screening for at ‘risk hips’ alone has a poor return. Female gender & clinical instability appear more important

Aim:. An assessment of the relationship between pathological Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip (DDH) and Congenital Talipes Equinovarus (CTEV). Introduction:. Traditional UK guidelines consider abnormalities of the foot to be a risk factor for DDH. 1,2. Currently, there is controversy whether congenital foot abnormalities are true risk factors for pathological DDH. 3,4. There is a relationship between CTCV and hip dysplasia though the relationship between CTEV and pathological DDH is less clear. 5. In a previous 11 year prospective longitudinal study no case of Graf Types III, IV or irreducible hip dislocation were associated with CTEV. 5. Subsequent correspondence and case histories have challenged this view. 6. Methods:. In order to clarify this issue, a 20-year prospective longitudinal observational study was undertaken. All cases of fixed CTEV (Harold & Walker types 1 to 3) referred to the sub-regional Paediatric Orthopaedic clinic at the Royal Blackburn Hospital were evaluated, the feet and hips clinically assessed (Ortolani & Barlow manoeuvres) and the hips ultra-sounded by the senior author (RWP). Modified Graf and Harcke hip ultrasound classification systems were employed. Graf Type III, IV and irreducible hip dislocation were considered pathological. Results:. The incidence of CTEV was 1.46 per 1000 live births (nationally quoted incidence of 1 to 2 per 1000 live births. 7. ). There was one case of Graf Type III dysplasia with no cases of clinical hip instability. Currently, the clinical significance of this type of dysplasia is uncertain. There were no cases of Graf Type IV dislocations or radiological irreducible hip dislocation. Conclusion:. Fixed CTEV should not be considered as a risk factor for pathological DDH and routine sonographic hip screening of CTEV should not be advocated. This is supportive evidence for the current English NIPE guidelines in which the only risk factors screened are family history and breech presentation. Level of evidence: II

Introduction. In Mid-Europe developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is diagnosed using the sonographic hip screening described by Graf. To learn the necessary standards three courses are mandatory. However, little is known about learning curves and measurement errors of doctors at different levels of training and experience. Material and Methods. Between 1997 and 2002 participants of the basic, advanced and final hip ultrasonogra-phy course were evaluated by a questionnaire and 34 normal and pathological sonograms. They were asked to measure the alpha and beta angle. “Normal” angles of each hip were created through the mean values of two experienced course organizers. Results. 186 doctors (40% orthopedic surgeons, 60% pediatricians) were evaluated. The group included 20% interns, 60% residents and 20% consultants. An average time of 6.3 months lay between the basic and the advanced, and of 16.7 months between the advanced and the final course. The evaluation of the sonograms according to Graf showed major inter-observer differences of up to 30°. Participants had more difficulties in evaluating a correct beta angle than an alpha angle. Sonographic pictures of minor quality and pathological hips produced more difficulties than pictures of Graf type I and II hips. In the basic course all measurements showed an average difference of 3,6°, in the advanced course of 3,1° and in the final course of 4,2°. The number of examinations between courses did not correlate with good measurements. Conclusion. Even participants of all three courses seem to develop major systemic errors if ultrasonography is regularly applied without supervision. Therefore, regular training and supervision should be mandatory in order to guarantee good quality