Skip to main content

Outcomes Following Hip Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 187 Accesses

Abstract

Three independent variables: the patient, the surgeon/surgical procedure, and the outcome measure directly affect the outcome of hip surgery. This chapter clarifies each independent variable using an example form the literature. It then characterizes the hip outcomes and puts them in perspective. Future research needs are introduced.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Larson CM, Giveans MR. Arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement: early outcomes measures. Arthroscopy. 2008;24(5):540–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Larson CM, Giveans MR. Arthroscopic debridement versus refixation of the acetabular labrum associated with femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(4):369–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bednarska E, Bryant D, Devereaux PJ. Orthopaedic surgeons prefer to participate in expertise-based randomized trials. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(7):1734–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Devereaux PJ, Bhandari M, Clarke M, Montori VM, Cook DJ, Yusuf S, et al. Need for expertise based randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;330(7482):88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee YK, Ha YC, Hwang DS, Koo KH. Learning curve of basic hip arthroscopy technique: CUSUM analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012. Epub 2012/10/18.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pollard TC, Khan T, Price AJ, Gill HS, Glyn-Jones S, Rees JL. Simulated hip arthroscopy skills: learning curves with the lateral and supine patient positions: a randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(10):e68. Epub 2012/05/24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Konan S, Rhee SJ, Haddad FS. Hip arthroscopy: analysis of a single surgeon’s learning experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93 Suppl 2:52–6. Epub 2011/05/13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vilchez F, Erquicia J, Tey M. Learning curve of arthroscopic hip surgery. Acta Ortop Mex. 2010;24(3):177–81. Epub 2010/09/15. Curva de aprendizaje en la cirugia artroscopica de cadera.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Souza BG, Dani WS, Honda EK, Ricioli Jr W, Guimaraes RP, Ono NK, et al. Do complications in hip arthroscopy change with experience? Arthroscopy. 2010;26(8):1053–7. Epub 2010/08/04.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Watters DA, Green AJ, van Rij A. Guidelines for surgical audit in Australia and New Zealand. ANZ J Surg. 2006;76(1–2):78–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Byrd JW, Jones KS. Hip arthroscopy in the presence of dysplasia. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(10):1055–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ware Jr J, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(4):737–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lodhia P, Slobogean GP, Noonan VK, Gilbart MK. Patient-reported outcome instruments for femoroacetabular impingement and hip labral pathology: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence. Arthroscopy. 2010;27(2):279–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW. A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Clin Rheumatol. 1986;5(2):231–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Christensen CP, Althausen PL, Mittleman MA, Lee JA, McCarthy JC. The nonarthritic hip score: reliable and validated. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Thorborg K, Roos EM, Bartels EM, Petersen J, Holmich P. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(16):1186–96. Epub 2009/08/12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Martin RL, Kelly BT, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(12):1304–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score in hip arthroscopy. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(8):822–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of reliability and responsiveness for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy. 2008;24(6):676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tijssen M, van Cingel R, van Melick N, de Visser E. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of the psychometric evidence. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:117. Epub 2011/05/31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(4):539–49. Epub 2010/02/20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Merle D’Aubigne R. Numerical evaluation of hip function. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1970;56(5):481–6.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Merle d’Aubigne R, Cauchoix J, Ramadier J. Evaluation chiffree de la fonction de la hanch. Application a l’etude des resultats des. Rev Chir Orthop. 1949;35:5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Merle D’Aubigne RM, Postel M. Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1954;36-A(3):451–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Larson CB. Rating scale for hip disabilities. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1963;31:85–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim KC, Hwang DS, Lee CH, Kwon ST. Influence of femoroacetabular impingement on results of hip arthroscopy in patients with early osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;456:128–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. In: Briggs K, Philippon M, editors. The use of outcome measures in hip arthroscopy. International society for hip arthroscopy annual scientific meeting. New York, NY; 2009. Accessed 9–10 Oct 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  29. In: Briggs KK, Philippon MJ, editors. Analysis of scores to document outcome following hip arthroscopy. International society for hip arthroscopy annual scientific meeting. New York, NY; 2009. Accessed 9–10 Oct 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Griffin DR, Parsons N, Mohtadi NG, Safran MR. A short version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) for use in routine clinical practice. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):611–6. quiz 6–8. Epub 2012/05/01.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mohtadi NG, Griffin DR, Pedersen ME, Chan D, Safran MR, Parsons N, et al. The development and validation of a self-administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):595–605. quiz 6–10 e1. Epub 2012/05/01.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Thorborg K, Holmich P, Christensen R, Petersen J, Roos EM. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(6):478–91. Epub 2011/04/12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(2):171–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kirkley A, Griffin S. Development of disease-specific quality of life measurement tools. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(10):1121–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kirshner B, Guyatt G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38(1):27–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Thorborg K, Holmich P, Christensen R, Petersen J, Roos EM. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(6):478–91. Epub 2011/04/12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mohtadi NG, Pedersen ME, Chan DS. Assessing outcomes after hip surgery. In: Sekiya JK, Safran MR, Ranawat AS, Leunig M, editors. Techniques in hip arthroscopy and joint preservation surgery. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier Inc; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klassbo M, Roos EM. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)—validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003;4:10. Epub 2003/06/05.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;198:43–9.

    Google Scholar 

  40. In: Phillips L, Mohtadi NG, Chan DS, editors. The responsivenss and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the MAHORN hip outcome tool. International society of hip arthroscopy annual scientific meeting. Cancun, Mexico; 2010. Accessed 8–9 Oct 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Krych AJ, Thompson M, Knutson Z, Scoon J, Coleman SH. Arthroscopic labral repair versus selective labral debridement in female patients with femoroacetabular impingement: a prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy. 2013;29(1):46–53. Epub 2013/01/02.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. YaDeau JT, Tedore T, Goytizolo EA, Kim DH, Green DS, Westrick A, et al. Lumbar plexus blockade reduces pain after hip arthroscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2012;115(4):968–72. Epub 2012/07/24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zingg PO, Ulbrich EJ, Buehler TC, Kalberer F, Poutawera VR, Dora C. Surgical hip dislocation versus hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: clinical and morphological short-term results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133(1):69–79. Epub 2012/10/16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ilizaliturri Jr VM, Chaidez C, Villegas P, Briseno A, Camacho-Galindo J. Prospective randomized study of 2 different techniques for endoscopic iliopsoas tendon release in the treatment of internal snapping hip syndrome. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(2):159–63. Epub 2009/01/28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas G. H. Mohtadi MD, MSc, FRCSC .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mohtadi, N.G.H. (2017). Outcomes Following Hip Surgery. In: McCarthy, J., Noble, P., Villar, R. (eds) Hip Joint Restoration. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0694-5_105

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0694-5_105

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-0693-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-0694-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics