Aims. The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiological measurements, and total hip arthroplasty (THA)-free survival in patients who underwent periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for mild, moderate, or severe developmental dysplasia of the hip. Patients and Methods. We performed a retrospective study involving 336 patients (420 hips) who underwent PAO by a single surgeon at an academic centre. After exclusions, 124 patients (149 hips) were included. The preoperative lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) was used to classify the severity of dysplasia: 18° to 25° was considered mild (n = 20), 10° to 17° moderate (n = 66), and < 10° severe (n = 63). There was no difference in patient characteristics between the groups (all, p > 0.05). Pre- and postoperative radiological measurements were made. The National Institute of Health’s Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) outcome measures (physical function computerized adaptive test (PF CAT), Global Physical and Mental Health Scores) were collected. Failure was defined as conversion to THA or PF CAT scores < 40, and was assessed with Kaplan–Meier analysis. The mean follow-up was five years (2 to 10) ending in either failure or the latest contact with the patient. Results. There was no significant difference in PROMs for moderate (p = 0.167) or severe (p = 0.708) groups compared with the mild dysplasia group. The numerical pain scores were between 2 and 3 units in all groups at the final follow-up (all, p > 0.05). There was no significant difference (all, p > 0.05) in the proportion of patients achieving target correction for the LCEA between groups. The mean correction was 12° in the mild, 15° in the moderate (p = 0.135), and 23° in the severe group (p < 0.001). Failure-free survival at five years was 100% for mild, 79% for moderate, and 92% for severely dysplastic hips (p = 0.225). Conclusion. Although requiring less correction than hips with moderate or severe dysplasia, we found PAO for mild dysplasia to be associated with promising PROMs, consistent with that of the general United States population, and excellent survivorship at five years. Future studies should compare these results with the outcome after arthroscopy of the hip in patients with mild dysplasia. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):16–22

Aims. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has demonstrated faster administration, lower burden of data capture and reduced floor and ceiling effects compared to traditional Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements (PROMs). We investigated the suitability of PROMIS Mobility score in assessing physical function in the sequelae of childhood hip disease. Methods. In all, 266 adolscents (aged ≥ 12 years) and adults were identified with a prior diagnosis of childhood hip disease (either Perthes’ disease (n = 232 (87.2%)) or Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (n = 34 (12.8%)) with a mean age of 27.73 years (SD 12.24). Participants completed the PROMIS Mobility Computer Adaptive Test, the Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. We investigated the correlation between the PROMIS Mobility and other tools to assess use in this population and any clustering of outcome scores. Results. There was a strong correlation between the PROMIS Mobility and other established PROMs; NAHS (rs = 0.79; p < 0.001). There was notable clustering in PROMIS at the upper end of the distribution score (42.5%), with less seen in the NAHS (20.3%). However, the clustering was broadly similar between PROMIS Mobility and the comparable domains of the NAHS; function (53.6%), and activity (35.0%). Conclusion. PROMIS Mobility strongly correlated with other tools demonstrating convergent construct validity. There was clustering of physical function scores at the upper end of the distributions, which may reflect truncation of the data caused by participants having excellent outcomes. There were elements of disease not captured within PROMIS Mobility alone, and difficulties in differentiating those with the highest levels of function. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1089–1095