Aims. The Uppföljningsprogram för cerebral pares (CPUP) Hip Score distinguishes between children with cerebral palsy (CP) at different levels of risk for displacement of the hip. The score was constructed using data from Swedish children with CP, but has not been confirmed in any other population. The aim of this study was to determine the calibration and discriminatory accuracy of this score in children with CP in Scotland. Methods. This was a total population-based study of children registered with the Cerebral Palsy Integrated Pathway Scotland. Displacement of the hip was defined as a migration percentage (MP) of > 40%. Inclusion criteria were children in Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels III to V. The calibration slope was estimated and Kaplan-Meier curves produced for five strata of CPUP scores to compare the observed with the predicted risk of displacement of the hip at five years. For discriminatory accuracy, the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was estimated. In order to analyze differences in the performance of the score between cohorts, score weights, and subsequently the AUC, were re-estimated using the variables of the original score: the child’s age at the first examination, GMFCS level, head shaft angle, and MP of the worst hip in a logistic regression with imputation of outcomes for those with incomplete follow-up. Results. The discriminatory accuracy of the score in the new population of 367 children was high (AUC 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.86)). The calibration of the score was insufficient (slope 0.48 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.65)), and the absolute risks of displacement of the hip in this population were overestimated. The AUC increased with re-estimated weights (0.85 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.91)). Conclusion. The CPUP Hip Score had a high ability to discriminate between children at different levels of risk for displacement of the hip. The score overestimated the absolute risks of displacement in this population, which may have resulted from differences in the way children were initially registered in the two programmes. The results are promising, but the score weights may need re-estimation before its clinical application in Scotland. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):640–644

The study aimed to determine how well recorded pain levels and range of motion relate to patients' reported levels of functional ability/disability pre- and post- total hip arthroplasty. Range of motion (ROM), Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Self-Report Harris Hip Score (HHS) were recorded pre-operatively and 3 months post-total hip arthroplasty. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the strength of the relationships both pre- and post-operatively between ROM (calculated using the HHS scoring system) and scores on OHS and HHS and response relating to pain from the questionnaires (question 1 HHS and questions 1, 6, 8, 10, 11 and 12 of OHS) and overall scores. Only weak relationships were found between ROM and HHS pre- (r = 0.061, n = 99, p = 0.548) and post-operatively (r = 0.373, n = 66, p = 0.002). Similar results were found for OHS, and when ROM was substituted for flexion range. In contrast, strong correlations were found between OHS pain component and HHS pre- (r = -0.753, n = 107, p<0.001) and post-operatively (r = -0.836, n = 87, p<0.001). Strong correlations were also found between the OHS pain component correlated with the HHS functional component only (HHS with score for questions relating to pain deducted) pre- (r = -0.665, n = 107, p<0.001) and post-operatively (r = -0.688, n = 87, p<0.001). Similar results were found when the HHS pain component was correlated with OHS. In orthopaedic clinical practice ROM is routinely used to assess the success or failure of arthroplasty surgery. These results suggest that this should not be done. Instead, asking the patient the level of pain that they are experiencing may be a good determinant of level of function. The results of this study may aid the development of arthroplasty scoring systems which better assess patients' functional ability

Aims. The aim of this study was to perform a cross-cultural adaptation of Oxford Hip Score (OHS) to Indonesian, and to evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods. We performed a cross-cultural adaptation of Oxford Hip Score into Indonesian language (OHS-ID) and determined its internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, floor-ceiling effect, responsiveness, and construct validity by hypotheses testing of its correlation with Harris Hip Score (HHS), vsual analogue scale (VAS), and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Adults (> 17 years old) with chronic hip pain (osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis) were included. Results. A total of 125 patients were included, including 50 total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients with six months follow-up. The OHS questionnaire was translated into Indonesian and showed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89) and good reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.98). The standard error of measurement value of 2.11 resulted in minimal detectable change score of 5.8. Ten out of ten (100%) a priori hypotheses were met, confirming the construct validity. A strong correlation was found with two subscales of SF-36 (pain and physical function), HHS (0.94), and VAS (-0.83). OHS-ID also showed good responsiveness for post-THA series. Floor and ceiling effect was not found. Conclusion. The Indonesian version of OHS showed similar reliability and validity with the original OHS. This questionnaire will be suitable to assess chronic hip pain in Indonesian-speaking patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):765–772

Disease specific or generic Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) can be completed by patients using paper and postal services (pPROMS) or via computer, tablet or smartphone (ePROMs) or by hybrid data collection, which uses both paper and electronic questionnaires. We have investigated whether there are differences in scores depending on the method of PROMs acquisition for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EQ-5D scores, at one and two years post operatively. Patients for this study were identified retrospectively from a prospectively compiled arthroplasty database held at the study centre. Patient demographics, mode of preferred data collection and pre- and post-operative PROMs for Total Hip Replacements (THRs) performed at this centre between 1. st. January 2018 and 31. st. December 2018 were collected. During the study period, 1494 patients underwent THRs and had complete one and two-year PROMs data available for analysis. All pre-operative scores were obtained by pPROMS. The average OHS and EQ-5D pre-operatively scores were 19.51 and 0.36 respectively. 72.02% of the patients consented to undertake post-operative questionnaires using ePROMs. The remaining 27.98% opted for pPROMS. The one and two-year OHS for ePROMS patients increased to 41.31 and 42.14 while the OHS scores for pPROMS patients were 39.80 and 39.83. At the one and two-year post-operative time intervals, a Mann-Whitney test showed statistical significance between the modes of administration for OHS (P-Value =0.044 and 0.01 respectively). The one and two-year EQ-5D for ePROMS patients increased to 0.83 and 0.84 while the EQ-5D scores for pPROMS patients were 0.79 and 0.81. The P-Value for Mann-Whitney tests comparing the modes of administration for EQ-5D were 0.13 and 0.07 respectively. Within Orthopaedics, PROMs have become the most widely used instrument to assess patients’ subjective outcomes. However, there is no agreed mode of PROMs data acquisition. While we have demonstrated an apparent difference in scores depending on the mode of administration, further work is required to establish the influence of potentially confounding factors such as patient age, gender and familiarity with computer technology

Introduction: Various surgical approaches have been described for the hip joint but the optimal surgical approach for total hip replacement remains controversial. The lateral approach & the posterior approach are the most commonly used approaches. Various scoring systems are in use to assess the outcome of total hip replacement. Since its introduction in 1996, Oxford hip score (OHS) has been validated in several studies. Total hip replacement has been shown to improve the OHS in several studies but we could not find any studies on effect of the surgical approach on OHS. Aim: To find out the affect of surgical approach on oxford hip score. Methods: Exeter Primary Outcomes Study was a prospective non-randomised multicentre study involving six centres across the UK. Ethical committee approval was taken and the study was conducted over a period of five years. 1610 patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent primary hip replacement with Exeter stem and were followed up in the clinics for pre-operative assessment and then at three months, year one, year two and year five post-operatively. Oxford hip score was noted at pre-operative assessment and postoperatively at three months, year one, two, three, four and five, either in the clinics or by post. All data was analysed in conjunction with a statistician using SPSS. Results: We had 1587 patients with regular follow-up. Lateral approach was the most common surgical approach (n=1143) compared to posterior approach (n=436). Sex ratio for each surgical approach was comparable. Oxford hip scores significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.05) up to four years, with both the surgical approaches. The posterior approach gave a better improvement in OHS compared to the lateral approach for all the four years. The absolute oxford hip scores improved significantly with the posterior approach for the first 12 months post-operatively. Conclusion: Posterior approach gives greater patient perceived clinical benefit in the first year after surgery which could help in early rehabilitation compared to lateral approach. This should be considered when assessing the best approach for the patients

Thirteen methods of hip scoring were applied in the postoperative assessment of 47 hip arthroplasties. Their results were found to be inconsistent, often giving contrary measures of success in the same patient. Ten variables were measured during the postoperative review of 256 hip arthroplasties and the data were submitted to multivariate factor analysis. This revealed that the ten variables could be reduced to three factors: pain, which correlated poorly with any other variable (Spearman correlation, r < 0.02); functional activity (distance walked, use of walking aids, stair climbing, use of public transport, limp, sitting and tying shoelaces); and deformity and range of movement. The range of hip flexion correlated closely with the sum of the arcs of movement and with Gade's index (Spearman correlation, r > 0.9). We suggest that, for outcome assessment, only three variables need to be recorded: pain, walking distance and range of hip flexion. The combination of these three measures into a single hip score is misleading

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine if the Oxford Knee and Hip Score (OKHS) can accurately predict when a primary knee or hip referral is deemed nonsurgical versus surgical by the surgeon during their first consultation, and to identify nonsurgical OKHS screening thresholds. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed pre-consultation OKHS for all consecutive primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) consultations of a single surgeon over three years. The 1436 knees (1016 patients) and 478 hips (388 patients) included were categorized based on the surgeon’s decision into those offered surgery during the first consultation versus those not (nonsurgical). Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were performed. Results. Oxford Scores were better for the nonsurgical cohorts (p < 0.001) and correlated with the surgical decision (p < 0.001). ROC area under the curve values for knees (0.83, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.81 to 0.85) and hips (0.87, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.91) were excellent. A conservative and effective threshold for knees is Oxford Knee Score (OKS) > 32 points (sensitivity = 0.997, negative predictive value (NPV) = 0.992) and for hips is Oxford Hip Score (OHS) > 34 points (sensitivity = 0.997, NPV = 0.978). Severable potential lower OKHS thresholds were identified. Conclusion. Pre-consultation OKHS demonstrate good ability to predict when a primary TKA or THA referral will be deemed nonsurgical in a single surgeon’s practice. Multiple OKHS thresholds can effectively screen out nonsurgical referrals. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):23–30

Objective: Assessment of hip function is done by surgeon and few patient based tools. These patient assessed scores do not measure range of motion. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons has outlined pain, mobility and range of motion as three fundamental aspects of joint assessment. We aimed to validate Oswestry hip score which was developed as a patient-completed self-assessment to provide both Harris hip score and Merle d’Aubigne hip score with added content to estimate hip range of motion. Methods: 144 patients completed the Oswestry hip score, WOMAC Index and the Oxford hip score at two different occasions. The patients were seen two weeks later and filled the Oswestry hip score and a surgeon filled the Harris hip score. The study included 80 females and 64 males with a mean age of 62 years range (32–91). We assessed the reliability, validity and responsiveness of this new tool by comparing the individual domains of the Oswestry hip score to similar domains of the WOMAC, Harris hip score and Oxford hip score. Results: The reliability of this new score was established by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. Internal consistency was measured by Cronbach’s alpha. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.7, which is considered a good measure of internal consistency. Content validity of the Oswestry hip score was established by the validated domains of pain, function and range of motion of the Harris hip score. Analysis of frequency of response distribution showed normal floor and ceiling effect for any of the domains of the Oswestry hip score. Multi-method multitrait matrix analysis was used to establish the construct validity of the Oswestry hip score. There was good correlation between pain and function domains (p< 0.001). Moderate correlation was found among clinical assessment of hip movement and movement domains of Oswestry hip score (Pearson’s r=0.55; p0.001). The responsiveness of the Oswestry hip score was measured with Cohen’s effect size. An effect size of > 0.8 is considered large. The mean effect size was 2.06 (1.36–2.97). Conclusion: A positive construct validity and high correlation with WOMAC, Oxford Hip Score and Harris hip score shows that the Oswestry hip score can give an adequate measure of hip joint function. An effect size of 2.0 shows good responsiveness of the Oswestry hip score. The Oswestry hip score can be completed by patients themselves and is therefore ideal for long-term and large scale collection of clinical outcome data

Objective: The aim of this study was to validate Oswestry hip score. This is a new score which was developed as a patient completed self-assessment to provide both Harris and Merle d’Aubigne hip score with added content to estimate hip range of motion. Methods: 61 patients completed the Oswestry hip score, the WOMAC and the SF-36. Validity was tested by comparing the domains and items of the Oswestry hip score to WOMAC and SF-36. The new movement scale of Oswestry hip score was specifically validated against Merle d’ Aubinge, mobility scoring system. SPSS software was used for statistical analysis. Results: Mean age was 56 years (range 18–83).Content validity of the Oswestry hip score was demonstrated by two main indicators for hip surgery, pain and function. Analysis of frequency of response distribution showed no floor or ceiling effect for any of the domains of the Oswestry hip score. Construct validity of the Oswestry hip score domains of pain and function showed good correlation with the correspondent domains of WOMAC and SF-36 (p< 0.001). Moderate correlation was found among clinical assessment of hip movement, Merle d’ Aubinge mobility score and movement domains of Oswestry hip score (Pearson’s r=0.55; p0.001). Correlation between Harris and Oswestry hip score was 0.63 to 0.91. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.7, showing good internal consistency. Conclusion: A positive construct validity and high correlation with WOMAC and SF-36 shows that the Oswestry hip score is can give an adequate measure of hip joint function. The new questionnaire is brief and can be completed by patients themselves. It is therefore ideal for long-term and large-scale collection of data. Oswestry hip score does not intend to replace the clinical examination at the critical phases following hip surgery but can be a useful adjunct. We report the validity and reliability of this new tool

This study investigates the use of the Metabolic Equivalent of Task (MET) score in a hip arthroplasty population and its ability to capture additional benefit beyond the maximum Oxford Hip Score (OHS). OHS, EuroQol-5D index (EQ-5D), and the MET were prospectively recorded in 221 primary hip arthroplasty procedures pre-operatively and at 1-year. The distribution was examined reporting the presence of ceiling & floor effects. Validity was assessed correlating the MET with the other scores using Spearman's rank and determining responsiveness using the standardised response mean (SRM). A subgroup of 93 patients scoring 48/48 on the OHS were analysed by age group, sex, BMI and pre-operative MET using the other two metrics to determine if differences could be established despite all scoring identically on the OHS. 117 total hip and 104 hip resurfacing arthroplasty operations were included. Mean age was 59.4 ± 11.3. Post-operatively the OHS and EQ-5D demonstrate significant negatively skewed distributions with ceiling effects of 41% and 53%, respectively. The MET was normally distributed post-operatively with no ceiling effect. Weak-moderate but statistically significant correlations were found between the MET and the other two metrics both pre & post-operatively. Responsiveness was excellent, SRM for OHS: 2.01, EQ-5D: 1.06 and MET: 1.17. In the 48/48 scoring subgroup, no differences were found comparing groups with the EQ-5D, however significantly higher MET scores were demonstrated for patients aged <60 (12.7 vs 10.6, p=0.008), male patients (12.5 vs 10.8, p=0.024) and those with pre-operative MET scores >6 (12.6 vs 11.0, p=0.040). The MET is normally distributed in patients following hip arthroplasty, recording levels of activity which are undetectable using the OHS. As a simple, valid activity metric, it should be considered in addition to conventional PROMs in order to capture the entire benefit experienced following hip arthroplasty

A large proportion of wait times for primary total knee (TKA) and hip (THA) arthroplasty is the time from primary care referral to surgical consultation. To our knowledge, no study has investigated whether a referral Oxford Knee or Hip Score (OKHS) could be used to triage non-surgical referrals appropriately. The primary purpose of the current study was to determine if a referral OKHS has the predictive ability to discriminate when a knee or hip referral will be deemed conservative as compared to surgical by the surgeon during their first consultation, and to identify an OKHS cut-off point that accurately predicts when a primary TKA or THA referral will be deemed conservative. We retrospectively reviewed all consecutive primary TKA and THA consultations from a single surgeon's tertiary, high volume practice over a three-year period. Patients with a pre-consultation OKHS, BMI < 4 1, and no absolute contraindication to TJR were included. Consultation knees/hips were categorized into two groups based on surgeon's decision, those that were offered TJR during their first consolation (surgical) versus those that were not (conservative). Baseline demographic data and OKHS were abstracted. Variables of interest were compared between cohorts using the exact chi-square test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to measure association between pre-consult OKHS and the surgeon's decision. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) and to identify a cut-off point for the pre-operative OKHS that identified whether or not a referral was deemed conservative. TKA and THA referrals were analyzed separately. The study included 1,436 knees (1,016 patients) with a median OKS of 25 (IQR 19–32) and 478 hips (388 patients) with a median OHS of 22 (IQR 16–29). Median pre-consultation OKHS demonstrated clinically and statistically significant differences between the surgical versus conservative cohorts (p 32 (sensitivity=0.997, NPV=0.992) and for hips is OHS >34 (sensitivity=0.997 NPV=0.978). ROC analysis identified severable potential lower OKHS thresholds, depending on weight of prioritization of sensitivity, specificity, and NPV. Referral OKS and OHS demonstrate good ability to discriminate when a primary TKA or THA referral will be deemed non-surgical versus surgical at their first consultation in a single surgeon's practice. Multiple potential effective OKHS thresholds can be applied as a tool to decrease wait times for primary joint arthroplasty. However, a cost analysis would aid in identifying the optimal cut-off score, and these findings need to be externally validated before they can be broadly applied

We have used the Oxford hip score to monitor the progress of 1908 primary and 279 revision hip replacements undertaken since the start of 1995. Our review programme began in early 1999 and has generated 3900 assessments. The mean pre-operative scores for primary and revision cases were 40.95 and 40.11, respectively. The mean annual score for primary replacement at between 12 and 84 months ranged between 20.60 and 22.57. A comparison of cross-sectional and longitudinal data showed no significant differences. All post-operative reviews showed a significant improvement (p ≤ 0.0001). The 50- to 60-year-old group scored significantly better than the patients over 80 years of age up to 48 months (p < 0.01). A subgroup of 826 National Health Service (NHS) and 397 private patients, treated by the senior author (2292 Oxford assessments), had a higher (i.e. worse) mean pre-operative score for the NHS patients (p ≤ 0.001). The private patients scored better than the NHS group up to 84 months (p < 0.05). Patients treated by a surgeon performing more than 100 replacements each year had a significantly better outcome up to five years than those operated on by surgeons performing fewer than 20 replacements each year. The age of the patients at the time of operation, and their pre-operative level of disability, have both been identified as affecting the long-term outcome. Awareness of the influence of these factors should assist surgeons to provide balanced advice

Introduction: Various surgical approaches have been described for the hip joint but the optimal surgical approach for total hip replacement remains controversial. The lateral approach & the posterior approach are the most commonly used approaches. Various scoring systems are in use to assess the outcome of total hip replacement. Since its introduction in 1996, Oxford hip score (OHS) has been validated in several studies. Total hip replacement has been shown to improve the OHS in several studies but we could not find any studies on effect of the surgical approach on OHS. AIM: To find out the affect of surgical approach on oxford hip score. Methods: Exeter Primary Outcomes Study was a prospective non-randomised multicentre study involving six centres across the UK. Ethical committee approval was taken and the study was conducted over a period of five years. 1610 patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent primary hip replacement with Exeter stem AND were followed up in the clinics for pre-operative assessment and then at three months, year one, year two and year five post-operatively. Oxford hip score was noted at pre-operative assessment and postoperatively at three months, year one, two, three, four and five, either in the clinics or by post. All data was analysed in conjunction with a statistician using SPSS. Results: We had 1587 patients with regular follow-up. Lateral approach was the most common surgical approach (n=1143) compared to posterior approach (n=436). Sex ratio for each surgical approach was comparable. Oxford hip scores significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.05) up to four years, with both the surgical approaches. The posterior approach gave a better improvement in OHS compared to the lateral approach for all the four years. The absolute oxford hip scores improved significantly with the posterior approach for the first 12 months post-operatively. CONCLUSION: Posterior approach gives greater patient perceived clinical benefit in the first year after surgery which could help in early rehabilitation compared to lateral approach. This should be considered when assessing the best approach for the patients

The goal of this study was to develop and validate a short, evaluative self-report questionnaire for the clinical self-assessment of patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). If used together with other self-report outcome tools (e.g. generic or physical activity measures), such a short joint-specific questionnaire could avoid an increased burden to the patients and decrease the risk of data loss. All items of the new score (Schulthess Hip Score, SHS) were generated solely on patient perceptions, for item removal we used the clinical severity-importance rating and inter-item correlation methods. The final score consisted of only five items. We then assessed the following metric properties of the SHS in 105 consecutive patients with symptomatic hip OA (mean age, 63.4 ± 11 years, 48 women) undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) in our clinic: proportion of evaluable questionnaires, reproducibility, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and responsiveness. 97% of the questionnaires were evaluable. Reproducibility of the SHS was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.90; standard error of the measure (SEM) 6.4). Exploratory factor analysis indicated that all items loaded on only 1 factor which accounted for 69.4% of the total variance. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.88. Evidence of convergent validity was provided by moderate to high correlations with scores and subscales of the WOMAC (r = 0.58–0.78), Oxford Hip Score (r = 0.78), Harris Hip Score (r = 0.37), SF-12 physical component scale (r = 0.57), UCLA activity scale (r = 0.48), and Tegner score (r = 0.53). Evidence of divergent validity was provided by a lower correlation with the SF-12 mental component scale (r = 0.37). The SHS proved to be responsive with an effect size (ES) of 2.15 and a standard response mean (SRM) of 1.74 six months after THA. Taken together, the results of this study provide evidence to support the use of the five-item self-report SHS in patients with hip osteoarthritis. Considering the brevity of this score, it could be easily used together with other measures such as generic and physical activity assessment tools, without overburdening patients with an inordinate number of items and questions

Introduction: The Oxford hip score (OHS) instrument is used to assess pain and disability before and after hip arthroplasty and may be used as a standard for auditing pre and post-operative patients. It has been suggested that patients with a low pre-operative hip score (< 25th percentile) should be carefully assessed before surgical management is employed. This study aimed to determine the factors that influence a surgeon’s decision to undertake hip arthroplasty in patients with a low pre-operative hip score. Methods: All patients who underwent hip arthroplasty over a two month period (n=121) were included. Of these, four pre-operative OHS questionnaires were missing. The remaining (117) were validated and those scoring below the published 25th percentile (58.3%) were selected (n=35), termed the ‘low-group’. Individual OHS responses scored 0–4 were examined (0 = no impairment and 4 = worst impairment) and the proportional differences between the responses for this group and the remaining 75% were investigated. The pre-operative radiographic Tönnis stage of osteoarthritis was determined. Results: The median cohort OHS was 68.8% (IQR = 50–79%). Of the questions that scored highly, 59% were purely pain related, 14% function and 27% both. 66% of patients experienced moderate/severe pain and 31% suffered night pain. The ‘low-group’ never scored 4 (worst impairment) on questions concerning washing, transport, shopping, stairs and work. However, 57% scored 4 on questions encompassing a pain component. In all questions except donning socks and walking, the proportion of 4 in the ‘low-group’ was significantly different to the remainder of the cohort. Tönnis grade 3 (osteophytes and advanced loss of joint space) osteoarthritis predominated (49%). Conclusion: Arthroplasty in patients with low pre-operative OHS is influenced mainly by pain affecting quality of life. Half of these patients also have advanced features of osteoarthritis on radiographic assessment despite the low scores

Objective. The objective of this study was to explore dimensionality of the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and examine whether self-reported pain and functioning can be distinguished in the form of subscales. Methods. This was a secondary data analysis of the UK NHS hospital episode statistics/patient-reported outcome measures dataset containing pre-operative OHS scores on 97 487 patients who were undergoing hip replacement surgery. . Results. The proposed number of factors to extract depended on the method of extraction employed. Velicer’s Minimum Average Partial test and the Parallel Analysis suggested one factor, the Cattell’s scree test and Kaiser-over-1 rule suggested two factors. Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the two-factor OHS had most of the items saliently loading either of the two factors. These factors were named ‘Pain’ and ‘Function’ and their respective subscales were created. There was some cross-loading of items: 8 (pain on standing up from a chair) and 11 (pain during work). These items were assigned to the ‘Pain’ subscale. The final ‘Pain’ subscale consisted of items 1, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. The ‘Function’ subscale consisted of items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, with the recommended scoring of the subscales being from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.855 for the ‘Pain’ subscale and 0.861 for the ‘Function’ subscale. A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the two-factor model of the OHS had a better fit. However, none of the one-factor or two-factor models was rejected. Conclusion. Factor analyses demonstrated that, in addition to current usage as a single summary scale, separate information on pain and self-reported function can be extracted from the OHS in a meaningful way in the form of subscales. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:305–9

Objectives. The Oxford hip score (OHS) is a 12-item questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain from the perspective of patients who are undergoing total hip replacement (THR). The OHS has been shown to be consistent, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinical change following THR. It has been translated into different languages, but no adequately translated, adapted and validated Danish language version exists. Methods. The OHS was translated and cross-culturally adapted into Danish from the original English version, using methods based on best-practice guidelines. The translation was tested for psychometric quality in patients drawn from a cohort from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register (DHR). Results. The Danish OHS had a response rate of 87.4%, no floor effect and a 19.9% ceiling effect (as expected in post-operative patients). Only 1.2% of patients had too many items missing to calculate a sum score. Construct validity was adequate and 80% of our predefined hypotheses regarding the correlation between scores on the Danish OHS and the other questionnaires were confirmed. The intraclass correlation (ICC) of the different items ranged from 0.80 to 0.95 and the average limits of agreement (LOA) ranged from -0.05 to 0.06. The Danish OHS had a high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.99 and an average inter-item correlation of 0.88. Conclusions. This Danish version of the OHS is a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measurement instrument (PROM) with similar qualities to the original English language version.

Introduction: Metal on metal hip resurfacing is a bone conserving procedure with excellent medium term results. A retrospective audit of 150 consecutive Birmingham Hip resurfacings, performed by a single surgeon at a DGH was carried out. Materials and Methods: We report 150 hip resurfacings implanted between June 2001 to June 2004. There were 99 male and 51 female hips. The mean age was 50.7 years (38–75years). Range of follow up was 6 months to 45 months (average 20.1 months). Pre operative diagnosis was Osteoarthritis (n=135), osteonecrosis(n=8),traumatic(n=2),dysplasia(n=3),Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (n=1) and ankylosing spondylitis (n=1). Al hips were implanted via the posterior approach. Clinical assessment, by postal questionnaire, was by pre and post-operative Oxford Hip scores (OHS) and X-rays were reviewed. Results: Range of follow up was 6 months to 42 months (average 20.1 months). No patient was lost to follow up. The mean pre operative Oxford hip score was 41 (r=27–56). The score was 15.1 (r=12–29) at the time of questionnaire. Complications included: One femoral neck fracture at 3 months requiring revision to a stemmed “big ball” THR, one deep infection requiring early wash out with salvage of the hip prosthesis, (both the patients are now doing well. OHS 13 and 15 respectively) and one asymptomatic stress fracture of femoral neck, which healed without intervention (OHS 12). There was one dislocation in a neuropathic hip requiring bracing. (OHS 29). There was one retained alignment pin needing removal. Otherwise patients were highly satisfied with the operation with excellent function and Hip scores. Conclusion: Our study has demonstrated that, in the short term and in young age group, this prosthesis gives excellent functional results, with an acceptably low complication rate. Long term surveillance of these patients will provide further data to compare our results with specialist centres

Introduction. Rationing of orthopaedic services is increasingly being used by Care Commissioning Groups (CCG) within the United Kingdom to restrict the numbers of patients being referred for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). In Devon, only patients with an Oxford Hip Score (OHS) less than 20 are referred on for specialist Orthopaedic Review. The aim of this study was to look at long term outcomes after THA to see if this rationing has any rational base to justify its use. Methods. Consecutive patients undergoing THA in Exeter between 1996 and 2012 had OHS' collected prospectively pre-operatively and a minimum of 4 years post-operatively. These scores were analysed looking for trends in patient related outcome scores. Results. 2341 patients had an OHS at a minimum of 4 years' post-op (mean 4.97 years, SD 0.33, range 4.0–5.5). This accounted for just under 50% of patients operated on in this period. Average improvement in OHS post THA was 19.6 points (range 0–44). 45.7% of patients undergoing THA had a pre-operative OHS of greater than the CCG threshold of 20. Patients did have a significantly better increase in post-operative OHS when their starting score was less than 20 but patients above this threshold still had a significant benefit from THA. However, patients with a pre-operative OHS less than 32 seemed to have more benefit from THA compared to those with a pre-op OHS of greater than 32. Interesting 7.8% of patients did not achieve the mean detectable change of 5 points in OHS at a minimum of 4 years' post THA. Conclusion. Rationing has been introduced in many CCG's around the country. Little of the rationing decisions have their basis in scientific fact and reasoning. Our data would suggest that 92.2% of patients undergoing THA have excellent outcomes. If rationing were to be fully patient centred all patients with an OHS less than 32 should be considered for THA

The Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and WOMAC are examples of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have well documented ceiling effects, with many patients clustered close to full marks following arthroplasty. Any arthroplasty that offers superior function would therefore fail to be detectable using these metrics. Two recent well conducted randomised clinical trials made exactly this error, by using OHS and WOMAC to detect a differences in outcome between hip resurfacing and hip arthroplasty despite published data already showing in single arm studies that these two procedures score close to full marks using both PROMS. We had observed that patients with hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) were able to walk faster and with more normal stride length than patients with well performing hip replacements, but that these objective differences in gait were not captured by PROMs. In an attempt to capture these differences, we developed a patient centred outcome measure (PCOM) using a method developed by Philip Noble's group. This allows patients to select the functions that matter to them personally against which the success of their own operation will be measured. Our null hypothesis was that this PCOM would be no more successful than the OHS in discriminating between types of hip arthroplasty. 22 patients with a well performing Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty were identified. These were closely matched by age, sex, BMI, height, preop diagnosis with 22 patients with a well performing conventional THA. Both were compared with healthy controls using the novel PCOM and in a gait lab. Results. PROMs for the two groups were similar, while HRA scored higher in the PCOM. The 9% difference was significant (p<0.05). At top walking speed, HRA were 10% faster, with a 9% longer stride length. Discussion. Outcome measures should be able to detect differences that are clinically relevant to patients and their surgeons. The currently used hip scores are not capable of delivering this distinction, and assume that most hip replacements are effectively perfect. While the function of hip replacements is indeed very good, with satisfaction rates high, objective measures of function are essential for innovators who are trying to deliver improved functional outcome. The 9% difference in PCOM found in this small study reflects the higher activity levels reported by many, and of similar magnitude to the 10% difference in top walking speed, despite no detectable difference in conventional PROMS. PCOMs may offer further insight into differences in function. For investigators who wish to develop improvements to hip arthroplasty, PCOMs and objective measures of gait may describe differences that matter more to patients than conventional hip scores