Literature DB >> 8934322

Demographic biases found in scoring instruments of total hip arthroplasty.

M R Brinker1, P J Lund, D D Cox, R L Barrack.   

Abstract

Four hip scoring systems were used in evaluating 200 adult subjects who had no prior history of injury, pathologic condition, or treatment of the hips, knees, lower extremities, or spine. All subjects were in the age range typical of a total hip arthroplasty candidate (average age, 65 years; range, 50-100 years). In addition to a physical examination, complete demographic data were collected on each subject. Data were recorded on standardized flow sheets so that hip scores could be calculated; scores were normalized by dividing the observed scores by the maximum possible score. The average normalized total hip scores were Harris hip score, 90.8%; modified Harris hip score, 91.9%; Merle D'Aubigne score, 93.9%; and Hospital for Special Surgery hip rating 87.5%. Demographic variables that had a significant negative correlation with hip scores included advanced age (particularly past age 85), an income below the poverty level, and the presence of two or more major medical conditions. Differences in hip scores between different study groups that have not been matched for various clinically relevant factors ("case mix") are at least as likely to represent differences in the patient populations as differences in surgical technique or implant design. Hip scores may decline over the course of a 10- to 20-year follow-up period due to the change in a patient's age and/or medical condition rather than any factor relating to the hip arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8934322     DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(96)80182-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  5 in total

1.  Similar survival of eccentric rotational acetabular osteotomy in patients younger and older than 50 years.

Authors:  Jin Yamaguchi; Yukiharu Hasegawa; Toshiya Kanoh; Taisuke Seki; Kiyoharu Kawabe
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-08       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Is total hip arthroplasty after hip arthrodesis as good as primary arthroplasty?

Authors:  Mariano Fernandez-Fairen; Antonio Murcia-Mazón; Ana Torres; Virginia Querales; Antonio Murcia
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  The Frank Stinchfield Award: the impact of socioeconomic factors on outcome after THA: a prospective, randomized study.

Authors:  R Allen Butler; Seth Rosenzweig; Leann Myers; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The 2012 John Charnley Award: Clinical multicenter studies of the wear performance of highly crosslinked remelted polyethylene in THA.

Authors:  Charles R Bragdon; Michael Doerner; John Martell; Bryan Jarrett; Henrik Palm; Henrik Malchau
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  The Cost of Routine Follow-Up in Total Joint Arthroplasty and the Influence of These Visits on Treatment Plans.

Authors:  Thomas J Hendricks; Alexander C M Chong; Robert P Cusick
Journal:  Kans J Med       Date:  2018-08-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.