Differences among the observers in the assessments of Japanese orthopedic association hip scores between surgeons and physical therapists and the correlations to patients’ reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty

Background We aimed to assess the utility of a clinician-reported outcome (the Japanese Orthopedic Association [JOA] hip score) as evaluated by clinicians and physiotherapists. This assessment was made by comparing these scores to those of the JOA hip disease evaluation questionnaire (JHEQ), which is a measurement of patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty. Methods In this retrospective case-control study, 52 hips that underwent primary total hip arthroplasty were included in the analyses. The mean age of the participants was 66.8 years (sex, seven male and 45 female participants). The JOA hip score included four categories: pain, range of motion, ability to walk, and active daily living. The JHEQ included three categories: pain, movement, and mental health. These scores were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively by clinicians or physiotherapists. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were utilized to analyze the association of the JOA hip scores to those of the JHEQ. Results The JOA hip scores were determined by clinicians and physiotherapists (scores of 46.8 and 57.3, respectively) preoperatively and at 24 months (scores of 94.4 and 91.7, respectively) postoperatively. The JHEQ points were 28.8 and 66.2 preoperatively and at 24 months postoperatively, respectively. The correlation coefficients between the JOA hip and JHEQ scores were .66 and .69 preoperatively and .57 and .76 at 24 months postoperatively, as evaluated by clinicians and physiotherapists, respectively. Conclusions Although the JHEQ scores were positively correlated to the JOA hip scores by clinicians and physiotherapists preoperatively and postoperatively, this study implies that clinicians may interpret the results in a way that might have been beneficial to them. To comprehend a patients’ health status, we should inclusively understand the varying range of information among different evaluators.

Use of the PROMIS Mobility score in assessing function in adolescents and adults previously affected by childhood hip disease

Aims The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has demonstrated faster administration, lower burden of data capture and reduced floor and ceiling effects compared to traditional Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements (PROMs). We investigated the suitability of PROMIS Mobility score in assessing physical function in the sequelae of childhood hip disease. Methods In all, 266 adolscents (aged ≥ 12 years) and adults were identified with a prior diagnosis of childhood hip disease (either Perthes’ disease (n = 232 (87.2%)) or Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (n = 34 (12.8%)) with a mean age of 27.73 years (SD 12.24). Participants completed the PROMIS Mobility Computer Adaptive Test, the Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. We investigated the correlation between the PROMIS Mobility and other tools to assess use in this population and any clustering of outcome scores. Results There was a strong correlation between the PROMIS Mobility and other established PROMs; NAHS ( rs = 0.79; p < 0.001). There was notable clustering in PROMIS at the upper end of the distribution score (42.5%), with less seen in the NAHS (20.3%). However, the clustering was broadly similar between PROMIS Mobility and the comparable domains of the NAHS; function (53.6%), and activity (35.0%). Conclusion PROMIS Mobility strongly correlated with other tools demonstrating convergent construct validity. There was clustering of physical function scores at the upper end of the distributions, which may reflect truncation of the data caused by participants having excellent outcomes. There were elements of disease not captured within PROMIS Mobility alone, and difficulties in differentiating those with the highest levels of function. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1089–1095.

Pelvic incidence is not associated with the development of hip osteoarthritis

Aims Pelvic incidence (PI) is considered an important anatomical parameter for determining the sagittal balance of the spine. The contribution of an abnormal PI to hip osteoarthritis (OA) remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between PI and hip OA, and the difference in PI between hip OA without anatomical abnormalities (primary OA) and hip OA with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH-OA). Methods In this study, 100 patients each of primary OA, DDH-OA, and control subjects with no history of hip disease were included. CT images were used to measure PI, sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. PI was also subdivided into three categories: high PI (larger than 64.0°), medium PI (42.0° to 64.0°), and low PI (less than 42.0°). The anterior centre edge angles, posterior centre edge angles, and total sagittal femoral head coverage were measured. The correlations between PI and sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion were examined. Results No significant difference in PI was observed between the three groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the category distribution of PI. The DDH-OA group had lower mean sagittal femoral head coverage than the other groups. There were no significant correlations between PI and other anatomical factors, including sagittal femoral head coverage, α angle, and acetabular anteversion. Conclusion No associations were found between mean PI values or PI categories and hip OA. Furthermore, there was no difference in PI between patients with primary OA and DDH-OA. From our evaluation, we found no evidence of PI being an independent factor associated with the development of hip OA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1656–1661.

Spine, Pelvis and Hip Kinematics—Characterizing the Axial Plane in Healthy and Osteoarthritic Hips

Abnormal spinopelvic movements are associated with inferior outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aims to (1) characterize the agreement between dynamic motion and radiographic sagittal assessments of the spine, pelvis, and hip; (2) determine the effect of hip osteoarthritis (OA) on kinematics by comparing healthy individuals with pre-THA patients suffering from uni- or bilateral hip OA. Twenty-four OA patients pre-THA and eight healthy controls underwent lateral spinopelvic radiographs in standing and seated bend-and-reach (SBR) positions. Lumbar-lordosis (LL), sacral-slope (SS), and pelvic–femoral (PFA) angles were measured in both positions, and the differences (Δ) between SBR and standing were computed to assess spine flexion (SF), pelvic tilt (PT), and hip flexion (HF), respectively. Dynamic SBR and seated maximal trunk rotation (STR) tasks were performed at the biomechanics laboratory. Peak sagittal and axial kinematics for spine, pelvis, and hip, and range of motion (ROM), were calculated for SBR and STR. Radiograph readings correlated with sagittal kinematics during SBR for ΔLL and SFmax (r = 0.66, p < 0.001), ΔPT and PTmax (r = 0.44, p = 0.014), and ΔPFA and HFmax (r = 0.70, p < 0.001), with a satisfactory agreement in Bland–Altman analyses. Sagittal SBR spinal (r = 0.33, p = 0.022) and pelvic (r =0.35, p = 0.018) flexions correlated with the axial STR rotations. All axial spinopelvic parameters were different between the OA patients and controls, with the latter exhibiting significantly greater mobility and less variability. Bilaterally affected patients exhibited lower peak and ROM compared to controls. The biomechanics laboratory performed reliable assessments of spinopelvic and hip characteristics, in which the axial plane can be included. The sagittal and axial pelvic kinematics correlate, illustrating that pelvic rotation abnormalities are likely also contributing to the inferior outcomes seen in patients with abnormal spinopelvic flexion characteristics. Axial rotations of the pelvis and spine were least in patients with bilateral hip disease, further emphasizing the importance of the hip–pelvic–spine interaction.

Individuals With Pre-arthritic Hip Pain Walk With Hip Motion Alterations Common in Individuals With Hip OA

Background: Individuals with hip osteoarthritis (OA) commonly walk with less hip extension compared to individuals without hip OA. This alteration is often attributed to walking speed, structural limitation, and/or hip pain. It is unclear if individuals who are at increased risk for future OA (i.e., individuals with pre-arthritic hip disease [PAHD]) also walk with decreased hip extension.Objectives: (1) Determine if individuals with PAHD exhibit less hip extension compared to individuals without hip pain during walking, and (2) investigate potential reasons for these motion alterations.Methods: Adolescent and adult individuals with PAHD and healthy controls without hip pain were recruited for the study. Kinematic data were collected while walking on a treadmill at three walking speeds: preferred, fast (25% faster than preferred), and prescribed (1.25 m/s). Peak hip extension, peak hip flexion, and hip excursion were calculated for each speed. Linear regression analyses were used to examine the effects of group, sex, side, and their interactions.Results: Individuals with PAHD had 2.9° less peak hip extension compared to individuals in the Control group (p = 0.014) when walking at their preferred speed. At the prescribed speed, the PAHD group walked with 2.7° less hip extension than the Control group (p = 0.022). Given the persistence of the finding despite walking at the same speed, differences in preferred speed are unlikely the reason for the reduced hip extension. At the fast speed, both groups increased their hip extension, hip flexion, and hip excursion by similar amounts. Hip extension was less in the PAHD group compared to the Control group (p = 0.008) with no significant group-by-task interaction (p = 0.206). Within the PAHD group, hip angles and excursions were similar between individuals reporting pain and individuals reporting no pain.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that kinematic alterations common in individuals with hip OA exist early in the continuum of hip disease and are present in individuals with PAHD. The reduced hip extension during walking is not explained by speed, structural limitation, or current pain.

Primary cam morphology; bump, burden or bog-standard? A concept analysis

BackgroundCam morphology, a distinct bony morphology of the hip, is prevalent in many athletes, and a risk factor for hip-related pain and osteoarthritis. Secondary cam morphology, due to existing or previous hip disease (eg, Legg-Calve-Perthes disease), is well-described. Cam morphology not clearly associated with a disease is a challenging concept for clinicians, scientists and patients. We propose this morphology, which likely develops during skeletal maturation as a physiological response to load, should be referred to as primary cam morphology. The aim of this study was to introduce and clarify the concept of primary cam morphology.DesignWe conducted a concept analysis of primary cam morphology using articles that reported risk factors associated with primary cam morphology; we excluded articles on secondary cam morphology. The concept analysis method is a rigorous eight-step process designed to clarify complex ‘concepts’; the end product is a precise definition that supports the theoretical basis of the chosen concept.ResultsWe propose five defining attributes of primary cam morphology—tissue type, size, site, shape and ownership—in a new conceptual and operational definition. Primary cam morphology is a cartilage or bony prominence (bump) of varying size at the femoral head-neck junction, which changes the shape of the femoral head from spherical to aspherical. It often occurs in asymptomatic male athletes in both hips. The cartilage or bone alpha angle (calculated from radiographs, CT or MRI) is the most common method to measure cam morphology. We found inconsistent reporting of primary cam morphology taxonomy, terminology, and how the morphology is operationalised.ConclusionWe introduce and clarify primary cam morphology, and propose a new conceptual and operational definition. Several elements of the concept of primary cam morphology remain unclear and contested. Experts need to agree on the new taxonomy, terminology and definition that better reflect the primary cam morphology landscape—a bog-standard bump in most athletic hips, and a possible hip disease burden in a selected few.

Functional outcomes, complications and revision rate of hip arthroplasty in patients with sequelae of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a systematic review

Background: Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) results in alterations to femoral head anatomy, predisposing patients to degenerative hip disease at a young age. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is performed to relieve symptoms and improve function. However, it can be associated with a variable outcomes and little evidence exists on the functional outcomes, complications and revision rate following such procedures. Purpose: The aim of this systematic review is to determine the safety and effectiveness of performing hip arthroplasty in patients with degenerative hips secondary to SCFE. Methodology: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature review was conducted of MEDLINE and Embase. Both single-arm and comparative studies were included. The outcomes of interest were functional scores, post-operative complications and revision rate. Results: Six studies fit the inclusion criteria. Of these, five were retrospective single-arm studies and one was a retrospective comparative study based on registry data. All studies reported significant improvement in hip function and quality of life after THA. An overall revision rate of 11.9% was reported, occurring at a mean of 6.5 years (0.75–18.7 years). THA in patients after SCFE leads to improved functional outcomes that are comparable to patients receiving THA for osteoarthritis. The revision rate appears to be higher than is reported in patients undergoing THA for osteoarthritis at mid-term follow-up. Further prospective comparative studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment in more detail. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:539-544. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200038