Introduction: The Trent arthroplasty register reported that results of Hip arthroplasty in general setup were less than that reported from specialist centres by 5%. This independent prospective study tests the hypothesis that results of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty from specialist centres would not accurately represent the outcome of hip resurfacing when performed in general setup.

Material and Methods: All patients were prospectively followed for at least five years at Oswestry Hip outcome centre. The surgeons carrying out the operation prospectively provided surgical details and thereafter patients were followed using Oswestry hip questionnaire (OSHIP) at fixed intervals. Survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier method. The results were compared to the published results of BHR from specialist centers

Results: There were 679 patients, and 58 surgeons in the study. Mean age at operation was 51 years and mean follow up was 5.63 years. The predominant preoperative diagnosis was osteoarthritis. The mean OSHIP score was 89.5. There were 29 (4.2%) failures mostly due to fracture neck of femur (62%); all of them were revised to conventional THR. The Kaplan-Meier survival at seven years is 95.354%.

Discussion: Compared to the published results, there were 2 to 19 times high failure rate which is significantly higher (p=0.001) than the published studies. Hence we prove our hypothesis, as the results of BHR from specialist centres do not accurately reflect on the outcome in general setup. The discrepancy in the results that we have identified would help to identify the weak areas in the general setup, where most of the patients get benefited from BHR arthroplasty.