Literature DB >> 26891895

What Is the Impact of Center Variability in a Multicenter International Prospective Observational Study on Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip?

Kishore Mulpuri1,2, Emily K Schaeffer3,4, Simon P Kelley5,6, Pablo Castañeda7, Nicholas M P Clarke8, Jose A Herrera-Soto9, Vidyadhar Upasani10, Unni G Narayanan5,6, Charles T Price9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Little information exists concerning the variability of presentation and differences in treatment methods for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in children < 18 months. The inherent advantages of prospective multicenter studies are well documented, but data from different centers may differ in terms of important variables such as patient demographics, diagnoses, and treatment or management decisions. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in baseline data among the nine centers in five countries affiliated with the International Hip Dysplasia Institute to establish the need to consider the center as a key variable in multicenter studies. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How do patient demographics differ across participating centers at presentation? (2) How do patient diagnoses (severity and laterality) differ across centers? (3) How do initial treatment approaches differ across participating centers?
METHODS: A multicenter prospective hip dysplasia study database was analyzed from 2010 to April 2015. Patients younger than 6 months of age at diagnosis were included if at least one hip was completely dislocated, whereas patients between 6 and 18 months of age at diagnosis were included with any form of DDH. Participating centers (academic, urban, tertiary care hospitals) span five countries across three continents. Baseline data (patient demographics, diagnosis, swaddling history, baseline International Hip Dysplasia Institute classification, and initial treatment) were compared among all nine centers. A total of 496 patients were enrolled with site enrolment ranging from 10 to 117. The proportion of eligible patients who were enrolled and followed at the nine participating centers was 98%. Patient enrollment rates were similar across all sites, and data collection/completeness for relevant variables at initial presentation was comparable.
RESULTS: In total, 83% of all patients were female (410 of 496), and the median age at presentation was 2.2 months (range, 0-18 months). Breech presentation occurred more often in younger (< 6 months) than in older (6-18 months at diagnosis) patients (30% [96 of 318] versus 9% [15 of 161]; odds ratio [OR], 4.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.5; p < 0.001). The Australia site was underrepresented in breech presentation in comparison to the other centers (8% [five of 66] versus 23% [111 of 479]; OR, 0.3, 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; p = 0.034). The largest diagnostic category was < 6 months, dislocated reducible (51% [253 of 496 patients]); however, the Australia and Boston sites had more irreducible dislocations compared with the other sites (ORs, 2.1 and 1.9; 95% CIs, 1.2-3.6 and 1.1-3.4; p = 0.02 and 0.015, respectively). Bilaterality was seen less often in older compared with younger patients (8% [seven of 93] versus 26% [85 of 328]; p < 0.001). The most common diagnostic group was Grade 3 (by International Hip Dysplasia Institute classification), which included 58% (51 of 88) of all classified dislocated hips. Splintage was the primary initial treatment of choice at 80% (395 of 496), but was far more likely in younger compared with older patients (94% [309 of 328] versus 18% [17 of 93]; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: With the lack of strong prognostic indicators for DDH identified to date, the center is an important variable to include as a potential predictor of treatment success or failure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26891895      PMCID: PMC4814398          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-4746-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  29 in total

1.  Levels of evidence at the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America annual meetings.

Authors:  Simon P Kelley; Megan S Cashin; Jeffrey R Douziech; Renjit A Varghese; Kishore Mulpuri
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.324

2.  Late diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip: an analysis of risk factors.

Authors:  Thomas Azzopardi; Phillipa Van Essen; Peter J Cundy; Graeme Tucker; Annabelle Chan
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop B       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Ultrasound screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip in the neonate: the effect on treatment rate and prevalence of late cases.

Authors:  K Rosendahl; T Markestad; R T Lie
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 7.124

4.  Genetic and environmental factors in the etiology of congenital dislocation of the hip.

Authors:  C O Carter; J A Wilkinson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1964 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Detection and Nonoperative Management of Pediatric Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip in Infants up to Six Months of Age.

Authors:  Kishore Mulpuri; Kit M Song; Michael J Goldberg; Kaitlyn Sevarino
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.020

6.  Is there a difference between the epidemiologic characteristics of hip dislocation diagnosed early and late?

Authors:  J F Haasbeek; J G Wright; D M Hedden
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 2.089

7.  Surgery for congenital dislocation of the hip in the UK as a measure of outcome of screening. MRC Working Party on Congenital Dislocation of the Hip. Medical Research Council.

Authors:  S Godward; C Dezateux
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-04-18       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  The efficacy of the Pavlik harness, the Craig splint and the von Rosen splint in the management of neonatal dysplasia of the hip. A comparative study.

Authors:  A Graham Wilkinson; David A Sherlock; Gordon D Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2002-07

9.  Developmental dysplasia of the hip: a new approach to incidence.

Authors:  V Bialik; G M Bialik; S Blazer; P Sujov; F Wiener; M Berant
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Authors:  Shahryar Noordin; Masood Umer; Kamran Hafeez; Haq Nawaz
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2010-09-23
View more
  4 in total

1.  Demographic and Practice Variability Amongst Indian Centres in a Multicentre Prospective Observational Study on Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

Authors:  Deepika Pinto; Alaric Aroojis; Hitesh Shah; Sandeep Patwardhan; K Venkatadass; Chittaranjan Sahu; Emily Schaeffer; Kishore Mulpuri
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 1.033

2.  Global Collaborations in Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip.

Authors:  Kishore Mulpuri; Emily K Schaeffer; Charles T Price
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 1.251

3.  Repeated Pelvic Radiographs in Infants, After Harness Treatment for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip, Carry Very Low Radiation Risk.

Authors:  Elizabeth Vogel; Thomas Leaver; Fiona Wall; Ben Johnson; Michael Uglow; Alexander Aarvold
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 1.251

4.  Diagnostic and treatment preferences for developmental dysplasia of the hip: a survey of EPOS and POSNA members.

Authors:  C Alves; W H Truong; M V Thompson; J R Suryavanshi; C L Penny; H T Do; E R Dodwell
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 1.548

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.