Influence of the contralateral hip state after total hip arthroplasty on patient-reported outcomes measured with the Forgotten Joint Score-12

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 929-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikio Matsumoto ◽  
Tomonori Baba ◽  
Hironori Ochi ◽  
Yu Ozaki ◽  
Taiji Watari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Forgotten Joint Score ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Posterior versus direct anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: difference in patient-reported outcomes measured with the Forgotten Joint Score-12

SICOT-J ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Ozaki ◽  
Tomonori Baba ◽  
Yasuhiro Homma ◽  
Hironori Ochi ◽  
Taiji Watari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Anterior Approach ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Direct Anterior Approach ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Forgotten Joint Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Introduction: When the postoperative outcome of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) was compared with the direct anterior approach (DAA) and the posterior approach (PA), there was no significant difference of the clinical outcome at 6 months to 1 year after surgery in many studies. This study was performed to compare the medium-term outcome of THA via the DAA or PA and clarify which approach achieves better quality of life (QOL). Methods: We investigated 61 hips receiving primary THA (30 via DAA and 31 via PA), using hip function scores such as the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and patient-reported outcomes such as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ), and the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS). Results: The mean duration of postoperative follow-up was 36.8 months in the DAA group and 40.5 months in the PA group. There was no difference in preoperative or postoperative HHS between the two groups. Although there was no difference of postoperative WOMAC and JHEQ, the postoperative FJS-12 score was significantly higher in the DAA group than in the PA group (75.2 ± 15.9 versus 60.1 ± 24.4, p = 0.01). Conclusion: When forgetting the artificial joint in daily life is the target, better QOL can be achieved by performing THA via the DAA.

scholarly journals Total Hip Arthroplasty: Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Forgotten Joint Score 12

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 2267
Author(s):  
Umile Giuseppe Longo ◽  
Sergio De Salvatore ◽  
Ilaria Piergentili ◽  
Anna Indiveri ◽  
Calogero Di Naro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Forgotten Joint Score ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Patient Acceptable Symptom State

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a valid patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess prosthesis awareness during daily activities after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) can be defined as the smallest change or difference that is evaluated as beneficial and could change the patient’s clinical management. The patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) is considered the minimum PROMs cut-off value that corresponds to a patient’s satisfactory state of health. Despite the validity and reliability of the FJS-12 having been already demonstrated, the MCID and the PASS of this score have not previously been defined. Patients undergoing THA from January 2019 to October 2019 were assessed pre-operatively and six months post-surgery using the FJS-12, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Pre-operative and follow-up questionnaires were completed by 50 patients. Both distribution-based approaches and anchor approaches were used to estimate MCID. The aim of this paper was to assess the MCID and PASS values of FJS-12 after total hip replacement. The FJS-12 MCID from baseline to 6 months post-operative follow-up was 17.5. The PASS calculated ranged from 69.8 to 91.7.

Importance of Retaining Sufficient Acetabular Depth: Successful 2-Year Outcomes of Hip Arthroscopy for Patients With Pincer Morphology as Compared With Matched Controls

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 2471-2480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia R. Brick ◽  
Catherine J. Bacon ◽  
Matthew J. Brick
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Acetabular Overcoverage

Background: Patients with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement are commonly treated with arthroscopic reduction of acetabular depth as measured by the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA). The optimal amount of rim reduction has not been established, although large resections may increase contact pressures through the hip. A recent publication demonstrated inferior surgical outcomes in patients with acetabular overcoverage as compared with normal acetabular coverage. Casual observation of our database suggested equivalent improvements, prompting a similar analysis. Purpose: To analyze patient-reported outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement in patients with acetabular overcoverage who were matched with controls with normal coverage, as well as to analyze associations with reduction in LCEA. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were collected prospectively from patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up after receiving hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement by a single surgeon. Cases were reviewed to identify those with pincer-type morphology (LCEA >40°) and matched according to sex, age, chondral damage, and surgery date in a 1:1 ratio with controls with an LCEA of 25° to 40°. The surgical goal was to reduce the LCEA to the upper end of the normal range with minimal rim resection, usually 35° to 37°. Radiographic measurements of coverage, intraoperative findings, procedures, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded, including the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, Non-arthritic Hip Score, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, visual analog scale for pain, rates of revision or reoperation, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Results: A total of 114 hips (93 patients) for the pincer group were matched 1:1 from 616 hips (541 patients) for the control group. The pincer group (mean ± SD age, 34.5 ± 12.2 years) did not differ in age, body mass index, or follow-up from controls. LCEA was reduced in both groups pre- to postoperatively: the pincer group from 44.0° ± 2.8° to 34.2° ± 3.5° and the controls from 32.9° ± 3.9° to 31.0° ± 3.0°. No differences in improvement were observed: iHOT-12 improved by 35.7 points in both groups ( P = .9 for analysis of variance interaction) and Nonarthritic Hip Score by 22.3 points ( P = .6). From all eligible surgical procedures, 2-year follow up rates were 2.5% and 2.6% for the pincer and control cohorts, respectively, and 1.2% and 0.3% for conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Conclusion: Arthroscopic management of acetabular overcoverage can achieve excellent results, equivalent to arthroscopy for other causes of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement. A key finding was smaller rim resections producing a mean postoperative LCEA of 34.2° with a small standard deviation.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Comparison Based on Surgical Approaches

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 1029-1035.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Finch ◽  
Brook I. Martin ◽  
Patricia D. Franklin ◽  
Laurence S. Magder ◽  
Vincent D. Pellegrini
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Patient Reported

Patient-Reported Outcomes Can Be Used to Streamline Post-Total Hip Arthroplasty Follow-Up to High-Risk Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (11) ◽  
pp. 3319-3321
Author(s):  
Jie J. Yao ◽  
Hilal Maradit Kremers ◽  
Cathy D. Schleck ◽  
Dirk R. Larson ◽  
Jasvinder A. Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Risk Patients

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Predictors after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Results from the Dresden Hip Surgery Registry

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Haase ◽  
Christian Kopkow ◽  
Franziska Beyer ◽  
Jörg Lützner ◽  
Stephan Kirschner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Hip Surgery ◽  
Outcome Predictors ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty Stratified by Body Mass Index

Orthopedics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. e572-e577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eddie S. Wu ◽  
Jeffrey J. Cherian ◽  
Julio J. Jauregui ◽  
Kristin Robinson ◽  
Steven F. Harwin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Patient Reported
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document