This study investigates the use of the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) score in a young hip arthroplasty population, and its ability to capture additional benefit beyond the ceiling effect of conventional patient-reported outcome measures. From our electronic database of 751 hip arthroplasty procedures, 221 patients were included. Patients were excluded if they had revision surgery, an alternative hip procedure, or incomplete data either preoperatively or at one-year follow-up. Included patients had a mean age of 59.4 years (SD 11.3) and 54.3% were male, incorporating 117 primary total hip and 104 hip resurfacing arthroplasty operations. Oxford Hip Score (OHS), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and the MET were recorded preoperatively and at one-year follow-up. The distribution was examined reporting the presence of ceiling and floor effects. Validity was assessed correlating the MET with the other scores using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and determining responsiveness. A subgroup of 93 patients scoring 48/48 on the OHS were analyzed by age, sex, BMI, and preoperative MET using the other metrics to determine if differences could be established despite scoring identically on the OHS.Aims
Methods
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. 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).Objectives
Methods
Outcomes following different types of surgical intervention for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) are well reported individually but comparative data are deficient. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis to analyze the outcomes following surgical management of FAI by hip arthroscopy (HA), anterior mini open approach (AMO), and surgical hip dislocation (SHD). This SR was registered with PROSPERO. An electronic database search of PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE for English and German language articles over the last 20 years was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We specifically analyzed and compared changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), α-angle, rate of complications, rate of revision, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA). A total of 48 articles were included for final analysis with a total of 4,384 hips in 4,094 patients. All subgroups showed a significant correction in mean α angle postoperatively with a mean change of 28.8° (95% confidence interval (CI) 21 to 36.5; p < 0.01) after AMO, 21.1° (95% CI 15.1 to 27; p < 0.01) after SHD, and 20.5° (95% CI 16.1 to 24.8; p < 0.01) after HA. The AMO group showed a significantly higher increase in
Objectives. High failure rates of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty implants have highlighted the need for more careful introduction and monitoring of new implants and for the evaluation of the safety of medical devices. The National Joint Registry and other regulatory services are unable to detect failing implants at an early enough stage. We aimed to identify validated surrogate markers of long-term outcome in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating surrogate markers for predicting long-term outcome in primary THA. Long-term outcome was defined as revision rate of an implant at ten years according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We conducted a search of Medline and Embase (OVID) databases. Separate search strategies were devised for the Cochrane database and Google Scholar. Each search was performed to include articles from the date of their inception to June 8, 2015. Results. Our search strategy identified 1082 studies of which 115 studies were included for full article review. Following review, 17 articles were found that investigated surrogate markers of long-term outcome. These included one systematic review, one randomised control trial (RCT), one case control study and 13 case series. Validated surrogate markers included Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) and Einzel-Bild-Röntgen-Analyse (EBRA), each measuring implant migration and wear. We identified five RSA studies (one systematic review and four case series) and four EBRA studies (one RCT and three case series). Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) at six months have been investigated but have not been validated against long-term outcomes. Conclusions. This systematic review identified two validated surrogate markers of long-term primary THA outcome: RSA and EBRA, each measuring implant migration and wear. We recommend the consideration of RSA in the pre-market testing of new implants. EBRA can be used to investigate acetabular wear but not femoral migration. Further studies are needed to validate the use of
The primary aim of this study was to assess the reproducibility of the recalled preoperative Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) one year following arthroplasty for a cohort of patients. The secondary aim was to assess the reliability of a patient’s recollection of their own preoperative OHS and OKS one year following surgery. A total of 335 patients (mean age 72.5; 22 to 92; 53.7% female) undergoing total hip arthroplasty (n = 178) and total knee arthroplasty (n = 157) were prospectively assessed. Patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty completed an OHS or OKS, respectively, preoperatively and were asked to recall their preoperative condition while completing the same score one year after surgery.Objectives
Methods
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. 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. Objective
Methods
Femoroacetabular Junction Impingement (FAI) describes abnormalities
in the shape of the femoral head–neck junction, or abnormalities
in the orientation of the acetabulum. In the short term, FAI can
give rise to pain and disability, and in the long-term it significantly increases
the risk of developing osteoarthritis. The Femoroacetabular Impingement
Trial (FAIT) aims to determine whether operative or non-operative
intervention is more effective at improving symptoms and preventing
the development and progression of osteoarthritis. FAIT is a multicentre superiority parallel two-arm randomised
controlled trial comparing physiotherapy and activity modification
with arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of symptomatic FAI.
Patients aged 18 to 60 with clinical and radiological evidence of
FAI are eligible. Principal exclusion criteria include previous
surgery to the index hip, established osteoarthritis (Kellgren–Lawrence
≥ 2), hip dysplasia (centre-edge angle <
20°), and completion
of a physiotherapy programme targeting FAI within the previous 12
months. Recruitment will take place over 24 months and 120 patients
will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio and followed up for three years.
The two primary outcome measures are change in hip outcome score
eight months post-randomisation (approximately six-months post-intervention
initiation) and change in radiographic minimum joint space width
38 months post-randomisation. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01893034. Cite this article: Aims
Methods
