Literature DB >> 23723283

Current screening recommendations for developmental dysplasia of the hip may lead to an increase in open reduction.

K R Price1, R Dove, J B Hunter.   

Abstract

Most centres in the United Kingdom adopt a selective screening programme for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) based on repeated clinical examination and selective ultrasound examination. The Newborn Infant Physical Examination protocol implemented in 2008 recommends a first examination at birth and then a second and final examination at six to ten weeks of age. Due to concerns over an increase in late presentations we performed a retrospective review of our 15-year results to establish if late presentation increases treatment requirements. Of children presenting before six weeks of age, 84% were treated successfully with abduction bracing, whereas 86% of children presenting after ten months eventually required open reduction surgery. This equates to a 12-fold increase in relative risk of requiring open reduction following late presentation. Increasing age at presentation was associated with an increase in the number of surgical procedures, which are inevitably more extensive and complex, with a consequent increased in cost per patient. The implementation of an opportunistic examination at three to five months could help to reduce the unintended consequences of the Newborn Infant Physical Examination programme.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DDH; Hip; NIPE; Open reduction; Policy; Screening; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23723283     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B6.31461

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  8 in total

1.  Evaluation of primary care 6- to 8-week hip check for diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a 15-year observational cohort study.

Authors:  Ronnie Davies; Christopher Talbot; Robin Paton
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Selective ultrasound screening is inadequate to identify patients who present with symptomatic adult acetabular dysplasia.

Authors:  Ernest L Sink; Benjamin F Ricciardi; Katrina Dela Torre; Charles T Price
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 1.548

3.  The most relevant diagnostic criteria for developmental dysplasia of the hip: a study of British specialists.

Authors:  Daniel Williams; Evangelia Protopapa; Kuldeep Stohr; James B Hunter; Andreas Roposch
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Outcomes following open reduction for late-presenting developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Authors:  P Castañeda; K Z Masrouha; C Vidal Ruiz; L Moscona-Mishy
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 1.548

5.  Universal or selective ultrasound screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip? A discussion of the key issues.

Authors:  R Biedermann; D M Eastwood
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 1.548

6.  Study protocol for evaluation of aid to diagnosis for developmental dysplasia of the hip in general practice: controlled trial randomised by practice.

Authors:  Andreas Roposch; Kaltuun Warsame; Angel Chater; Judith Green; Rachael Hunter; John Wood; Nick Freemantle; Irwin Nazareth
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Understanding physician behaviour in the 6-8 weeks hip check in primary care: a qualitative study using the COM-B.

Authors:  Angel Chater; Sarah Milton; Judith Green; Gill Gilworth; Andreas Roposch
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-03-19       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Should paediatricians initiate orthopaedic hip dysplasia referrals for infants with isolated asymmetric skin folds?

Authors:  C R Louer; J D Bomar; M E Pring; S J Mubarak; V V Upasani; D R Wenger
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 1.548

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.