Cargando…

Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Large–size hip articulations may improve range of motion (ROM) and function compared to a 28–mm THA, and the low risk of dislocation allows the patients more activity postoperatively. On the other hand, the greater extent of surgery for resurfacing hip arthroplasty (RHA) coul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Penny, Jeannette Østergaard, Ovesen, Ole, Varmarken, Jens–Erik, Overgaard, Søren
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2013
Materias:
Hip
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3715815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23530872
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.788435
_version_ 1782277507437821952
author Penny, Jeannette Østergaard
Ovesen, Ole
Varmarken, Jens–Erik
Overgaard, Søren
author_facet Penny, Jeannette Østergaard
Ovesen, Ole
Varmarken, Jens–Erik
Overgaard, Søren
author_sort Penny, Jeannette Østergaard
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Large–size hip articulations may improve range of motion (ROM) and function compared to a 28–mm THA, and the low risk of dislocation allows the patients more activity postoperatively. On the other hand, the greater extent of surgery for resurfacing hip arthroplasty (RHA) could impair rehabilitation. We investigated the effect of head size and surgical procedure on postoperative rehabilitation in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS: We followed randomized groups of RHAs, large–head THAs and standard THAs at 2 months, 6 months, 1 and 2 years postoperatively, recording clinical rehabilitation parameters. RESULTS: Large articulations increased the mean total range of motion by 13° during the first 6 postoperative months. The increase was not statistically significant and was transient. The 2–year total ROM (SD) for RHA, standard THA, and large–head THA was 221° (35), 232° (36), and 225° (30) respectively, but the differences were not statistically significant. The 3 groups were similar regarding Harris hip score, UCLA activity score, step rate, and sick leave. INTERPRETATION: Head size had no influence on range of motion. The lack of restriction allowed for large articulations did not improve the clinical and patient–perceived outcomes. The more extensive surgical procedure of RHA did not impair the rehabilitation. This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under # NCT01113762.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3715815
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37158152013-07-19 Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial Penny, Jeannette Østergaard Ovesen, Ole Varmarken, Jens–Erik Overgaard, Søren Acta Orthop Hip BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Large–size hip articulations may improve range of motion (ROM) and function compared to a 28–mm THA, and the low risk of dislocation allows the patients more activity postoperatively. On the other hand, the greater extent of surgery for resurfacing hip arthroplasty (RHA) could impair rehabilitation. We investigated the effect of head size and surgical procedure on postoperative rehabilitation in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS: We followed randomized groups of RHAs, large–head THAs and standard THAs at 2 months, 6 months, 1 and 2 years postoperatively, recording clinical rehabilitation parameters. RESULTS: Large articulations increased the mean total range of motion by 13° during the first 6 postoperative months. The increase was not statistically significant and was transient. The 2–year total ROM (SD) for RHA, standard THA, and large–head THA was 221° (35), 232° (36), and 225° (30) respectively, but the differences were not statistically significant. The 3 groups were similar regarding Harris hip score, UCLA activity score, step rate, and sick leave. INTERPRETATION: Head size had no influence on range of motion. The lack of restriction allowed for large articulations did not improve the clinical and patient–perceived outcomes. The more extensive surgical procedure of RHA did not impair the rehabilitation. This project is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under # NCT01113762. Informa Healthcare 2013-06 2013-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3715815/ /pubmed/23530872 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.788435 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopaedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited.
spellingShingle Hip
Penny, Jeannette Østergaard
Ovesen, Ole
Varmarken, Jens–Erik
Overgaard, Søren
Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title_full Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title_short Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
title_sort similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty: 2–year results from a randomized clinical trial
topic Hip
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3715815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23530872
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.788435
work_keys_str_mv AT pennyjeannetteøstergaard similarrangeofmotionandfunctionafterresurfacinglargeheadorstandardtotalhiparthroplasty2yearresultsfromarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT ovesenole similarrangeofmotionandfunctionafterresurfacinglargeheadorstandardtotalhiparthroplasty2yearresultsfromarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT varmarkenjenserik similarrangeofmotionandfunctionafterresurfacinglargeheadorstandardtotalhiparthroplasty2yearresultsfromarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT overgaardsøren similarrangeofmotionandfunctionafterresurfacinglargeheadorstandardtotalhiparthroplasty2yearresultsfromarandomizedclinicaltrial