Bed Exercises following Total Hip Replacement: 1 Year follow-up of a Single-Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 268-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby O. Smith ◽  
Charles J.V. Mann ◽  
Allan Clark ◽  
Simon T. Donell
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Replacement ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Education Programme ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Randomised Controlled

This paper presents the results of a study assessing whether bed exercises after primary THR (total hip replacement) improves function or quality of life, during the first post-operative year. Sixty patients undergoing primary THR were randomised to receive either a gait re-education programme and bed exercises (Group A) or a gait re-education programme without bed exercises (Group B) post-operatively. The Iowa level of assistance Scale (ILOA) and Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) were assessed at baseline, 3 days, 6 weeks and 1 year post-operatively. There was no statistically significant difference in either ILOA or SF-12 after 1 year between Group A or B. There was no evidence of a subgroup effect by either the surgical approach or prosthesis fixation in either ILOA or SF-12.

scholarly journals Comparative study between outcome of noncemented and cemented total hip replacement

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 1512
Author(s):  
M. Tofayel Hossain ◽  
M. Asaduzzaman ◽  
M. Wahidur Rahman ◽  
Subir Hossain
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Total Hip Replacement ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Computer Software ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Age Range

Background: To resolve the damage and pain in the joint in the hip, total hip replacement (THR) is used. There are some methods used to give THR, but cemented and noncemented THR are common to improve the result of the cemented THR as patients face some complications after replacement. In this study we compared the outcome of the noncemented and cemented THR. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of noncemented and cemented THR and find out the favorable outcome.Methods: This was a randomized, comparative type of observational study and was conducted in the Department of Orthopedics of National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Bangladesh during the period from 2019 to 2020 on 60 patients, of which 2 groups were made with 30 patients in each group. The age range was less than 50 to more than 70. In group-A cemented THR was done and in group-B noncemented THR was done. Percentage was calculated to find out the proportion of the findings. Further statistical analysis of the results was done by computer software devised in the statistical packages for social scientist (SPSS-23) and MS excel.Results: After comparing outcomes, we saw that most of the patients get better result at the 2nd revision conducted in 6th months. There was no significant difference between the results of the two groups.Conclusions: Though noncemented THR had better result in pain and infection occurrence after treatment, the instability is higher comparing cemented THR. Besides, patients cemented THR also had many complications after treatment.

scholarly journals A study to assess functional outcome of cemented and uncemented total hip replacement in a tertiary care center

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 828
Author(s):  
Kunal Ajitkumar Shah ◽  
Mohan Madhav Desai
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Total Hip Replacement ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Group B

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Total hip replacement (THR) is the most successful and cost effective treatment with aim of pain relief and functional rehabilitation for hip disorders. As the implant designs of THR have evolved over time, the functional outcome and survivorship has improved. Even after so many advancements, it remains unclear that which implants are better, uncemented or cemented. Hence, we took up this study to analyze which of the uncemented or cemented THR have better functional outcome.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> This was a longitudinal study conducted during 2014 to 2018. Hundred cases were randomized into groups of 50 each. All patients with age between 55-80 years in whom THR was indicated were included in the study. Uncemented THR was done in Group A and cemented THR was done in Group B. Patients were followed up at 12 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and 3 years. At follow-up, functional examination in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Harris hip score (HHS) was done.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> The mean age of patients in Group A (uncemented) and Group B (cemented) was 62.5 years and 60 years respectively. We found that the difference of VAS score and HHS between Group A and B was statistically significant at 12 weeks and 6 months. The difference of VAS and HHS scores between Group A and B at 12 months and 3 years was not significant.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> We conclude that cemented THR has better functional outcome at short term. They are cost effective option at age ≥55-60 years.</p>

scholarly journals Better before–better after: efficacy of prehabilitation for older patients with osteoarthritis awaiting total hip replacement—a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in South-Eastern Norway

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e031626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Odd-Einar Svinøy ◽  
Astrid Bergland ◽  
May Arna Risberg ◽  
Are Hugo Pripp ◽  
Gunvor Hilde
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Total Hip Replacement ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Hospital Referral ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionHealth professions need to prepare for the increase of older patients with osteoarthritis requiring health services including those requiring total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The primary objective of this study is to assess the effect of a tailored prehabilitation programme of older patients awaiting primary surgery for total hip replacement on physical function measured by walking speed within 1 week after intervention as well as 6 weeks and 3 months after TJA surgery.Methods and analysisThis is a single-blinded randomised controlled trial. The participants are 70 years or older, scheduled for primary total hip replacement due to late stage osteoarthritis. The intervention group will receive patient education and exercise for 6–12 weeks. The control group will receive care as usual. The primary outcome is gait speed. Secondary outcomes are lower body strength, mobility, aerobic capacity, activity of daily living, length of stay at the hospital, referral to an inpatient rehabilitation clinic, pain, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Estimated sample size is 150 participants randomised into the two arms. The data will be analysed following the intention-to-treat principle with methods for repeated measurements.Ethics and disseminationThe project proposal has been approved by The Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics in South Norway (ref no. 2018/503). The results will be published in peer-reviewed articles.Trial registration numberNCT03602105

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document