David M Levy1, Benjamin D Kuhns2, Jaskarndip Chahal2, Marc J Philippon3, Bryan T Kelly4, Shane J Nho2. 1. Hip Preservation Center, Section of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush Medical College of Rush University, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.. Electronic address: David_Levy@rush.edu. 2. Hip Preservation Center, Section of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush Medical College of Rush University, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 3. Steadman Philippon Research Institute, The Steadman Clinic, Vail, Colorado, U.S.A. 4. Center for Hip Preservation, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether the hip arthroscopy literature to date has shown outcomes consistent with published patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimates. METHODS: All clinical investigations of hip arthroscopy using modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and/or Hip Outcome Score (HOS) outcomes with at least 1 year of follow-up were reviewed. Ninety-one studies (9,746 hips) were included for review. Eighty-one studies (9,317 hips) contained only primary hip arthroscopies and were the primary focus of this review. The remaining studies (429 hips) did not exclude patients with prior surgical history and were thus considered separately. Mean mHHS, HOS-ADL (Activities of Daily Living) and HOS-SS (Sports-Specific) scores were compared with previously published PASS and MCID values. RESULTS: After 31 ± 20 months, 5.8% of study populations required revision arthroscopy and 5.5% total hip arthroplasty. A total of 88%, 25%, and 30% of study populations met PASS for mHHS, HOS-ADL, and HOS-SS, respectively, and 97%, 90%, and 93% met MCID. On bivariate analysis, increasing age was associated with significantly worse postoperative mHHS (P < .01, R(2) = 0.14), HOS-SS (P = .05, R(2) = 0.12), and rates of reoperation (P = .02, R(2) = 0.08). Increasing body mass index was associated with significantly worse HOS-ADL (P = .02, R(2) = 0.35) and HOS-SS (P = .03, R(2) = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of 81 studies of primary hip arthroscopy, we have found that more than 90% of study populations meet MCID standards for the most commonly used patient-reported outcomes measures in hip arthroscopy literature, mHHS and HOS. Eighty-eight percent meet PASS standards for the mHHS, but PASS standards are far more difficult to achieve for HOS-ADL (25%) and HOS-SS (30%) subscales. Differences in psychometric properties of the mHHS and HOS likely account for the discrepancies in PASS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the hip arthroscopy literature to date has shown outcomes consistent with published patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimates. METHODS: All clinical investigations of hip arthroscopy using modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and/or Hip Outcome Score (HOS) outcomes with at least 1 year of follow-up were reviewed. Ninety-one studies (9,746 hips) were included for review. Eighty-one studies (9,317 hips) contained only primary hip arthroscopies and were the primary focus of this review. The remaining studies (429 hips) did not exclude patients with prior surgical history and were thus considered separately. Mean mHHS, HOS-ADL (Activities of Daily Living) and HOS-SS (Sports-Specific) scores were compared with previously published PASS and MCID values. RESULTS: After 31 ± 20 months, 5.8% of study populations required revision arthroscopy and 5.5% total hip arthroplasty. A total of 88%, 25%, and 30% of study populations met PASS for mHHS, HOS-ADL, and HOS-SS, respectively, and 97%, 90%, and 93% met MCID. On bivariate analysis, increasing age was associated with significantly worse postoperative mHHS (P < .01, R(2) = 0.14), HOS-SS (P = .05, R(2) = 0.12), and rates of reoperation (P = .02, R(2) = 0.08). Increasing body mass index was associated with significantly worse HOS-ADL (P = .02, R(2) = 0.35) and HOS-SS (P = .03, R(2) = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of 81 studies of primary hip arthroscopy, we have found that more than 90% of study populations meet MCID standards for the most commonly used patient-reported outcomes measures in hip arthroscopy literature, mHHS and HOS. Eighty-eight percent meet PASS standards for the mHHS, but PASS standards are far more difficult to achieve for HOS-ADL (25%) and HOS-SS (30%) subscales. Differences in psychometric properties of the mHHS and HOS likely account for the discrepancies in PASS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.
Authors: Michael R Karns; Temitope F Adeyemi; Andrew R Stephens; Stephen K Aoki; Mark E Beese; Michael J Salata; Travis G Maak Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: David A Bloom; Daniel J Kaplan; David J Kirby; Daniel B Buchalter; Charles C Lin; Jordan W Fried; Nainisha Chintalapudi; Thomas Youm Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Dominic S Carreira; Daniel B Shaw; Andrew B Wolff; John J Christoforetti; John P Salvo; Benjamin R Kivlan; Dean K Matsuda Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2022-09-10 Impact factor: 3.479
Authors: Kate N Jochimsen; Brian Noehren; Carl G Mattacola; Stephanie Di Stasi; Stephen T Duncan; Cale Jacobs Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 3.824
Authors: Lindsey Brown-Taylor; Brittany Schroeder; Cara L Lewis; Jennifer Perry; Timothy E Hewett; John Ryan; Stephanie Di Stasi Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2020-04-13 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Adam I Edelstein; Jeffrey J Nepple; Wahid Abu-Amer; Cecilia Pascual-Garrido; Charles W Goss; John C Clohisy Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-05-01 Impact factor: 4.176