This study aims to determine, by outcome analysis, the appropriateness of current criteria employed to select patients for total hip arthroplasty (THA) as the primary treatment for displaced intracapsular hip fracture (DICHF) and to inform prospective randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of THA as a primary treatment.

Contemporary THA eligibility criteria were derived from recent publications relating to pre-fracture residence, mobility and independence. Outcome data were analysed for 96 patients (19% of 506 consecutive patients with DICHF between 2003–2005) who fulfilled those criteria. The variables analysed included age, gender, co-existing injuries, co-morbidities, social circumstances, mobility, independence, delay to surgery, readmission, and death. Patients were followed for three years. The primary outcome was the combined achievement of home or warden-assisted accommodation at three months, no re-admission within 6 weeks and survival to 1 year. Secondary outcome was survival to three years.

At 3-months 86 patients (90%) had returned home, three (3.1%) required nursing or residential home placement, four (4.2%) were still resident in a community hospital, and three (3.1%) had died. Eight patients (8.3%) were re-admitted within 6-weeks. Mortality was 8.3% at 1-year and 25% at 3-years. Patients not achieving return to home were older (84.8 years vs. 79.7 years, p=0.19), were more likely to use a walking aid (OR 2.35) or required home support (OR 1.74) prior to fracture. The number of co-morbidities was not an association. Backward selection identified age as a significant variable in patients successfully discharged home (OR 1.12, CI 1.01 – 1.21).

If maintaining a high level of activity and independence is the expectation for hip fracture patients considered for THA then current selection criteria appear appropriate in identifying those 15% capable of returning home, remaining independent and surviving to one year.

Introduction: Ideally any screening system should use a simple reliable test with good intraobserver reproducibility. This is important in DDH as once there is an established abnormality surgical intervention is frequently required. The aim of early detection (within six weeks) is to increase the number of children that may be treated nonoperatively. We have evaluated the effectiveness of our selective screening program by determining the late presentation rate of DDH in our region.

Methods: Between January 2001 and December 2003 we looked retrospectively at all patients presenting with DDH in our region. We recorded their age at scan and presentation, the Graf classification if recorded, their management, the presence of risk factors for DDH, referral source and presence of a positive clinical examination. All these were entered into a database and analyzed specifically with regard to patients presenting late.

Results: In the period between January 2001 and June 2002 prior to selective ultrasound screening (Group 1) there were 9441 live births and 26 cases of DDH (incidence of 2.75). There were 11 late presenters with an incidence of 1.12 per 1000 per year. Between July 2002 and December 2003 (Group 2) there were 9428 live births and 20 cases of DDH (incidence of 2.12). There were 3 late presenters with an incidence of 0.3 per 1000 per year.

Discussion: We have shown that a program of selective ultrasound screening in our region has decreased the number of children presenting late with DDH. It must be remembered however, that in the absence of any risk factors, clinical examination remains critical in identifying those with DDH in a selective screening program.