James R Berstock1,2, Ashley W Blom1,2, Michael R Whitehouse1,2. 1. Musculoskeletal Research Unit, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Level 1 Learning and Research Building, Southmead Hospital, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK. 2. Avon Orthopaedic Centre, Brunel Building, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The omega approach represents a modification of the lateral approach to the hip for joint replacement. It was developed to reduce the potential for gluteus muscle dysfunction and thereby improve functional outcome following hip replacement. METHODS: A cohort of 415 consecutive hip replacements receiving the same type of cemented femoral component were followed up at a mean of three years postoperatively and invited to complete functional outcome and satisfaction scores. RESULTS: There were no differences between the omega and the posterior approach in terms of post-operative Oxford Hip Score, Short Form-12 score, patient satisfaction and a range of radiographic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The omega approach appears to perform equally to the posterior approach in this cohort of patients.
BACKGROUND: The omega approach represents a modification of the lateral approach to the hip for joint replacement. It was developed to reduce the potential for gluteus muscle dysfunction and thereby improve functional outcome following hip replacement. METHODS: A cohort of 415 consecutive hip replacements receiving the same type of cemented femoral component were followed up at a mean of three years postoperatively and invited to complete functional outcome and satisfaction scores. RESULTS: There were no differences between the omega and the posterior approach in terms of post-operative Oxford Hip Score, Short Form-12 score, patient satisfaction and a range of radiographic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The omega approach appears to perform equally to the posterior approach in this cohort of patients.
Authors: Simon S Jameson; James Mason; Paul Baker; Paul J Gregg; Ian A McMurtry; David J Deehan; Mike R Reed Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Robert G Marx; Edward C Jones; Nawal C Atwan; Robert F Closkey; Eduardo A Salvati; Thomas P Sculco Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Piers J Yates; Nasir A Quraishi; Allan Kop; Donald W Howie; Clare Marx; Eric Swarts Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 4.757