The UK falls behind other European countries in the early detection of Developmental Dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and there remains controversy surrounding screening strategies for early detection. Clinical detection of DDH is challenging and recognised to be dependent on examiner experience. No studies exist assessing the number of personnel currently involved in such assessments. Our objective was to study the current screening procedure by studying a cohort of new-born babies in one teaching hospital and assess the number of health professionals involved in neonatal hip assessment and the number of examinations undertaken during one period by each individual. This was a retrospective observational study assessing all babies born consecutively over a 14-week period in 2020. Record of each initial baby check was obtained from Maternity or Neonatal Badger. Follow-up data on ultrasound or orthopaedic outpatient referrals were obtained from clinical records. 1037 babies were examined by 65 individual examiners representing 9 different healthcare professional groups. The range of examinations conducted per examiner was 1- 97 with a mean of 15.9 examinations per person. 49% individuals examined 5 or less babies across the 14 weeks, with 18% only performing 1 examination. Of the 5 babies (0.48%) treated for DDH, one was picked up on neonatal assessment. In a system where so many examiners are involved in neonatal hip assessment the experience is limited for most examiners. It is unsurprising that high current rates of late presentation of DDH are observed locally, which are in accordance with published national experience

Following the neonatal examination the 6–8 week ‘GP check’ forms the second part of selective surveillance for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in the UK. We aim to investigate the effectiveness of this 6–8 week examination for DDH. This is a observational study including all infants born in our region over 5 years. Early presentation was defined as diagnosis within 14 weeks of birth and late presentation after 14 weeks. Treatment record for early and late DDH as well as referrals for ultrasound (US) following the 6–8 week check were analysed. The attendance at the 6–8 week examination in those patients who went on to present with a late DDH was also analysed. 23112 live births, there were 141 confirmed cases of DDH. 400 referrals for ultrasound were received from GP; 6 of these had a positive finding of DDH. 27 patients presented after 14 weeks and were classified as late presentations. 25 of these patients had attended the 6–8 week examination and no abnormality had been identified. The sensitivity of the examination was 19.4%, its specificity was 98% and it had a positive predictive value of 1.5%. For many years the 6–8 week ‘check’ has been thought of as a safety net for those children with DDH not identified as neonates, however we found that 4 out of every 5 children with DDH were not identified. It is essential efforts are made to impove detection as the long term consequences of late presentation can be life changing

Aim. The purpose of this study was to analyze the patellofemoral kinematics in neglected adult developmental dysplasia of the hip patients with patellofemoral symptoms and tried to clarify the affect of the severity of dislocation, the amount of limb length discrepancy, the deviation of mechanical axis and the changes in femoral anteversion on patellofemoral alignment. Methods. The dynamic patellofemoral CT results of 39 patients with DDH suffering from knee pain were reviewed. The mean age was 40.07 (range: 22–61). 14 of them were bilateral and 25 were unilateral neglected DDH patients. The CT results of 12 patients suffering from unilateral patellofemoral pain following the treatment of locked intramedullary nailing was taken as control group. In this patients atraumatic and asymptomatic normal site was taken as control group. Results. In unilateral neglected DDH patients there was significantly higher medial patellar displacement in 0, 15, 30, 60 degrees flexion in the knee at the site of dislocation. Again in uninvolved site medial patellar displacement in 15, 30, 60 degrees flexion was higher with respect to control group. In the involved extremity the PTA angle in 0, 15, 30, 60 degrees flexion were significantly higher than in control group. This increase in PTA angle corresponding to medial patellar tilt was observed only in involved extremity. In the knees of patients with bilateral DDH there was significant medial patellar displacement in every flexion degrees with respect to control group. Besides in bilateral DDH patients, the PTA angle in 15, 30, 60 degrees flexion were significantly higher than control group corresponding to medial patellar tilt. The amount of leg length discrepancy and the severity of dislocation as well as mechanical axis deviation were not affecting the patellofemoral parameters in both unilateral and bilateral DDH patients. Conclusion. Both in unilateral and bilateral DDH patients there are major changes in patellar tracking on femur during knee flexion. Increased medial shift and medial patellar tilt were seen in these patient groups. The neglected DDH patients suffering from knee pain should be analyzed not only for tibiofemoral abnormalities but also for patellofemoral malignment

Aims. We investigated the local epidemiology of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip (DDH), in order to define incidence, identify risk factors, and refine our policy on selective ultrasound screening. Methods. Data were recorded prospectively on all live births in the Exeter area from January 1998 to December 2008. We compared those treated for DDH with all other children. Crude odds ratios (OR) were calculated to identify potential risk factors. Logistic regression was then used to control for interactions between variables. Results. There were 182 children with DDH (245 hips) and 37,051 without. The incidence was thus 4.9 per 1000 live births. Female sex (adjusted OR 7.2, 95% CI 4.6–11.2), breech presentation (adjusted OR 24.3, 13.1–44.9), positive family history (adjusted OR 15.9, 11.0–22.9) and first or second pregnancy (adjusted OR 1.8, 1.5–2.3) were confirmed as risk factors (p<0.001). In addition, there was an increased risk with vaginal delivery (adjusted OR 2.7, 1.6–4.5, p<0.001) and postmaturity (OR 1.7, 1.2–2.4, p<0.002). Conclusions. One in 200 children born in our area requires treatment for DDH. Using both established and novel risk factors, we can potentially calculate an individual child's risk. Our work may contribute to the debate about selective versus universal ultrasound screening