NDLI: No Clinically Meaningful Differences in 1-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between Hip Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Age-Matched Prospective Cohort Study

Please wait, while we are loading the content...

No Clinically Meaningful Differences in 1-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between Hip Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Age-Matched Prospective Cohort Study

Content Provider	Scilit
Author	Siqueira, Marcelo
Copyright Year	2021
Abstract	This study compared patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), readmissions, and reoperations between hip resurfacing (HR) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a matched prospective cohort. Between 2015 and 2017, 4,268 patients underwent HR or THA at a single institution. A prospective cohort of 2,147 patients were enrolled (707 HRs, 1,440 THAs). PROMs were collected at baseline and 1-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria: females (n = 2,008), inability/refusal to complete PROMs (n = 54), and diagnosis other than osteoarthritis (n = 59). Each HR patient was age-matched to a THA patient. Multivariate regression models were constructed to control for race, body mass index, education, smoking status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, mental health, and functional scores. A significance threshold was set at p = 0.017. A total of 707 HRs and 707 THAs were analyzed and 579 HRs (81.9%) and 490 THAs (69.3%) were followed up at 1 year. There was no statistically significant difference for Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (HOOS) Pain subscale (p = 0.129) and HOOS-Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS) (p = 0.03). HR had significantly higher median University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scores (p = 0.004). Ninety-day readmissions for HR and THAs were 1.8 and 3.5%, respectively (p = 0.06), and reoperations at 1 year were 1.2 and 2.3%, respectively (p = 0.24). For male patients, differences in medians for UCLA activity scores were 0.383 points, which were statistically significant but may not be clinically relevant. No differences exist in 90-day readmissions, reoperations, and $HOOS^{pain}$ and HOOS-PS scores. Because patients undergoing HR are advised to return to full activity at 1-year postoperative, follow-up is required. Metal ion levels were not obtained postoperatively for either group. Nicolas S. Piuzzi, Wael K. Barsoum, Michael R. Bloomfield, Peter J. Brooks, Robert J. Hampton, Carlos A. Higuera, Alison K. Klika, Viktor E. Krebs, John P. McLaughlin, Nathan W. Mesko, Robert M. Molloy, Michael A. Mont, George F. Muschler, Trevor G. Murray, Robert J. Nickodem, Lukas M. Nystrom, Preetesh D. Patel, Brendan M. Patterson, Kim L. Stearns, Gregory J. Strnad, Kurt P. Spindler, Atul F. Kamath (Cleveland Clinic Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland, Ohio); Juan C. Suarez (Cleveland Clinic Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Weston, Florida); Alexander Zajicheck (Cleveland Clinic Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland, Ohio). Received: 03 March 2020 Accepted: 30 June 2020 Article published online: 15 June 2021 © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
Related Links	http://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0040-1722281.pdf
Ending Page	090
Page Count	7
Starting Page	084
ISSN	24728446
e-ISSN	24728454
DOI	10.1055/s-0040-1722281
Journal	The Journal of Hip Surgery
Issue Number	02
Volume Number	05
Language	English
Publisher	Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Publisher Date	2021-06-15
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Journal: The Journal of Hip Surgery Total Hip Arthroplasty Patient-reported Outcome Measures
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

The relationship between patient-reported outcomes and preoperative pain characteristics in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty

The Effect of Travel Distance on Outcomes for Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty at a High-Volume Center.

What Are the Benefits of Hip Resurfacing in Appropriate Patients? A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Increasing age does not influence hip-specific functional outcome or health-related quality of life following total hip arthroplasty a five-year prospective cohort study

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty in patients aged under 40 years.

The relationship between patient-reported outcomes and preoperative pain characteristics in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty.

Gait after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: an age-matched controlled prospective study.

Resurfacing hip replacement and cemented total hip replacement have equivalent outcome at one year in a disease matched population: a case-control study of patient reported outcome measures.

No Clinically Meaningful Differences in 1-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between Hip Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Age-Matched Prospective Cohort Study

Similar Documents

Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

The relationship between patient-reported outcomes and preoperative pain characteristics in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty

The Effect of Travel Distance on Outcomes for Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty at a High-Volume Center.

What Are the Benefits of Hip Resurfacing in Appropriate Patients? A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Increasing age does not influence hip-specific functional outcome or health-related quality of life following total hip arthroplasty a five-year prospective cohort study

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty in patients aged under 40 years.

The relationship between patient-reported outcomes and preoperative pain characteristics in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty.

Gait after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: an age-matched controlled prospective study.

Resurfacing hip replacement and cemented total hip replacement have equivalent outcome at one year in a disease matched population: a case-control study of patient reported outcome measures.

No Clinically Meaningful Differences in 1-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between Hip Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Age-Matched Prospective Cohort Study