Cargando…
Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A Comparative Study
BACKGROUND: Hip microinstability is an increasingly recognized cause of pain and disability in young adults. It is unknown whether differences in passive hip range of motion (ROM) exist between patients with versus without hip microinstability. HYPOTHESIS: Underlying ligamentous and capsular laxity...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10280519/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37347027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231169978 |
_version_ | 1785060812466946048 |
---|---|
author | Curtis, Daniel M. Pullen, W. Michael Hopkins, Justin N. Murray, Iain R. Money, Adam Segovia, Nicole A. Safran, Marc R. |
author_facet | Curtis, Daniel M. Pullen, W. Michael Hopkins, Justin N. Murray, Iain R. Money, Adam Segovia, Nicole A. Safran, Marc R. |
author_sort | Curtis, Daniel M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Hip microinstability is an increasingly recognized cause of pain and disability in young adults. It is unknown whether differences in passive hip range of motion (ROM) exist between patients with versus without hip microinstability. HYPOTHESIS: Underlying ligamentous and capsular laxity will result in differences in clinically detectable passive ROM between patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), patients with microinstability, and asymptomatic controls. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 2012 and 2018 was conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of isolated microinstability based on intraoperative findings were identified and classified as having isolated FAI, instability, or FAI + instability. Patients without a history of hip injury were included as controls. Range of motion was recorded in the supine position for flexion, internal rotation, and external rotation. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed on each measurement in isolation as well as combinations of motion to include total rotation arc, flexion + rotation arc, and flexion + 2× rotation arc Models were then created and tested to predict instability status. RESULTS: In total, 263 hips were included: 69 with isolated instability, 50 with FAI, 50 with FAI + instability, and 94 control hips. A higher proportion of patients in the instability and FAI + instability groups were female compared with the FAI and control groups (P < .001). On univariate analysis, differences were found in all groups in all planes of motion (P < .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated differences in all groups in flexion and flexion + rotation arc. In symptomatic patients, the best performing predictive model for hip microinstability was flexion + rotation arc ≥200° (Akaike information criterion, 132.3; P < .001) with a sensitivity of 68.9%, specificity of 80.0%, positive predictive value of 89.1%, and negative predictive value of 51.9%. CONCLUSION: Patients with hip microinstability had significantly greater ROM than symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts without hip microinstability. Symptomatic patients with hip flexion + rotation arc ≥200° were highly likely to have positive intraoperative findings for hip microinstability, whereas instability status was difficult to predict in patients with a flexion + rotation arc of <200°. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10280519 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102805192023-06-21 Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A Comparative Study Curtis, Daniel M. Pullen, W. Michael Hopkins, Justin N. Murray, Iain R. Money, Adam Segovia, Nicole A. Safran, Marc R. Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Hip microinstability is an increasingly recognized cause of pain and disability in young adults. It is unknown whether differences in passive hip range of motion (ROM) exist between patients with versus without hip microinstability. HYPOTHESIS: Underlying ligamentous and capsular laxity will result in differences in clinically detectable passive ROM between patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), patients with microinstability, and asymptomatic controls. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 2012 and 2018 was conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of isolated microinstability based on intraoperative findings were identified and classified as having isolated FAI, instability, or FAI + instability. Patients without a history of hip injury were included as controls. Range of motion was recorded in the supine position for flexion, internal rotation, and external rotation. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed on each measurement in isolation as well as combinations of motion to include total rotation arc, flexion + rotation arc, and flexion + 2× rotation arc Models were then created and tested to predict instability status. RESULTS: In total, 263 hips were included: 69 with isolated instability, 50 with FAI, 50 with FAI + instability, and 94 control hips. A higher proportion of patients in the instability and FAI + instability groups were female compared with the FAI and control groups (P < .001). On univariate analysis, differences were found in all groups in all planes of motion (P < .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated differences in all groups in flexion and flexion + rotation arc. In symptomatic patients, the best performing predictive model for hip microinstability was flexion + rotation arc ≥200° (Akaike information criterion, 132.3; P < .001) with a sensitivity of 68.9%, specificity of 80.0%, positive predictive value of 89.1%, and negative predictive value of 51.9%. CONCLUSION: Patients with hip microinstability had significantly greater ROM than symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts without hip microinstability. Symptomatic patients with hip flexion + rotation arc ≥200° were highly likely to have positive intraoperative findings for hip microinstability, whereas instability status was difficult to predict in patients with a flexion + rotation arc of <200°. SAGE Publications 2023-06-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10280519/ /pubmed/37347027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231169978 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Article Curtis, Daniel M. Pullen, W. Michael Hopkins, Justin N. Murray, Iain R. Money, Adam Segovia, Nicole A. Safran, Marc R. Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A Comparative Study |
title | Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A
Comparative Study |
title_full | Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A
Comparative Study |
title_fullStr | Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A
Comparative Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A
Comparative Study |
title_short | Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A
Comparative Study |
title_sort | can hip passive range of motion predict hip microinstability? a
comparative study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10280519/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37347027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231169978 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT curtisdanielm canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT pullenwmichael canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT hopkinsjustinn canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT murrayiainr canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT moneyadam canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT segovianicolea canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy AT safranmarcr canhippassiverangeofmotionpredicthipmicroinstabilityacomparativestudy |