KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3

Correlation between Harris, modified Harris hip, and Oxford hip scores of patients who underwent hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty following hip fracture

Turan Bilge Kızkapan
Abdulhamit Misir
Gokay Eken
Sinan Oguzkaya
Mustafa Özçamdallı
Erdal Uzun
Sayfa
308–314
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Our findings suggest that MHHS and OHS are useful for evaluating functional outcomes with HA, primary and revision THA, and THA with femoral shortening osteotomy for Crowe type IV DDH.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:BACKGROUND: Harris hip score (HHS), modified HHS (MHHS), and Oxford hip score (OHS) were designed to determine the functional outcomes after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:METHODS: A total of 399 patients (254 females and 145 males) that included 128 cases of primary THA, 36 of revision THA, 200 of HA, and 35 of THA with femoral shortening osteotomy with a minimum of 24 months of follow-up were included.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Our findings suggest that MHHS and OHS are useful for evaluating functional outcomes with HA, primary and revision THA, and THA with femoral shortening osteotomy for Crowe type IV DDH.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Harris hip score (HHS), modified HHS (MHHS), and Oxford hip score (OHS) were designed to determine the functional outcomes after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between MHHS, HHS, and OHS in different populations of arthroplasty such as primary THA, revision THA, THA for Crowe Type IV developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), and hip hemiarthroplasty (HA). METHODS: A total of 399 patients (254 females and 145 males) that included 128 cases of primary THA, 36 of revision THA, 200 of HA, and 35 of THA with femoral shortening osteotomy with a minimum of 24 months of follow-up were included. HHS, MHHS, and OHS were calculated for each patient and the correlation between theses scores was evaluated for each subgroup. RESULTS: The overall mean age was 67.5±14.3 years. The mean HHS, MHHS, and OHS were 74.9±17.9, 75.7±18.7, and 38.7±12.5, respectively. A very strong correlation was observed between HHS and MHHS (r=0.995, p=0.000) as well as between HHS and OHS (r=0.845, p=0.003) in the general study population. In subgroup analysis, there was a very strong correlation between HHS and MHHS in primary THA, revision THA, THA in hip HA, and Crowe Type IV DDH groups (r=0.984, p=0.000; r=0.977, p=0.000; r=0.984, p=0.000; and r=0.995, p=0.000; respectively). However, there was a significant correlation between HHS and OHS in these groups except revision THA group (r=0.851, p=0.023; r=0.587, p=0.069; r=0.989, p=0.002; and r=0.965, p=0.000; respectively). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to investigate the usefulness of MHHS and OHS in hip HA and THA in patients with Crowe Type IV DDH. Our findings suggest that MHHS and OHS are useful for evaluating functional outcomes with HA, primary and revision THA, and THA with femoral shortening osteotomy for Crowe type IV DDH.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Kızkapan, T. B., Misir, A., Eken, G., Oguzkaya, S., Özçamdallı, M., Uzun, E. (2022). Correlation between Harris, modified Harris hip, and Oxford hip scores of patients who underwent hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty following hip fracture. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 3, 308–314. https://ajindex.com/articles/644024

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. . Putananon C, Tuchinda H, Arirachakaran A, Wongsak S, Narinsorasak T, Kongtharvonskul J. Comparison of direct anterior, lateral, posterior and posterior-2 approaches in total hip arthroplasty: Network me- ta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2018
  2. 255–67. 2. Katz JN, Wright EA, Wright J, Malchau H, Mahomed NN, Stedman M, et al. Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the U.S. Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012
  3. 1825–32. 3. Zagra L. Advances in hip arthroplasty surgery: What is justified? EFORT Open Rev 2017
  4. 171–8. 4. Singh JA. Epidemiology of knee and hip arthroplasty: A systematic re- view. Open Orthop J 2011
  5. 80–5. 5. Gwam CU, Mistry JB, Mohamed NS, Thomas M, Bigart KC, Mont MA, et al. Current epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States: National inpatient sample 2009 to 2013. J Arthroplasty 2017
  6. 2088–92. 6. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007
  7. 780–5. 7. Veldman HD, Heyligers IC, Grimm B, Boymans TA. Cemented versus cementless hemiarthroplasty for a displaced fracture of the femoral neck: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current generation hip stems. Bone Joint J 2017
  8. 421–31. 8. Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol 2003
  9. 46–51. 9. Garbuz DS, Xu M, Sayre EC. Patients’ outcome after total hip arthro- plasty: A comparison between the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index and the Oxford 12-item hip score. J Arthroplasty 2006
  10. 998–1004. 10. Aprato A, Jayasekera N, Villar RN. Does the modified Harris hip score reflect patient satisfaction after hip arthroscopy? Am J Sports Med 2012
  11. 2557–60. 11. Soderman P, Malchau H, Herberts P. Outcome of total hip replacement: A comparison of different measurement methods. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001
  12. 163–72. 12. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the per- ceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996
  13. 185–90. 13. Dawson J, Jameson-Shortall E, Emerton M, Flynn J, Smith P, Gundle R, et al. Issues relating to long-term follow-up in hip arthroplasty sur- gery: A review of 598 cases at 7 years comparing 2 prostheses using re- vision rates, survival analysis, and patient-based measures.