Cargando…

Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs

Canine hip dysplasia is the most common orthopedic developmental condition in the dog and early hip laxity is the main risk factor. The importance of hip laxity in young animals in the development of hip dysplasia is unanimously recognized among researchers and veterinarians due to its medical appli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Santana, Ana, Alves-Pimenta, Sofia, Martins, João, Colaço, Bruno, Ginja, Mário
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32974397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00491
_version_ 1783577811727941632
author Santana, Ana
Alves-Pimenta, Sofia
Martins, João
Colaço, Bruno
Ginja, Mário
author_facet Santana, Ana
Alves-Pimenta, Sofia
Martins, João
Colaço, Bruno
Ginja, Mário
author_sort Santana, Ana
collection PubMed
description Canine hip dysplasia is the most common orthopedic developmental condition in the dog and early hip laxity is the main risk factor. The importance of hip laxity in young animals in the development of hip dysplasia is unanimously recognized among researchers and veterinarians due to its medical applicability in terms of disease control and prevention. In the market, there is some certified hip distractors to promote joint laxity. However, the clinical use of some of these distractors complies with a set of usage rules, that can limit its medical application. In this study was compared the technical quality of radiographs and hip distraction using a certified hip distractor (CertD) and Dis-UTAD in 104 dogs (208 joints). The mean pelvic tilting of 1.5 ± 1.6° and 1.5 ± 1.8° were similar when using the CertD and the Dis-UTAD distractors, respectively (P > 0.05). In the CertD sample, the mean hip distraction index (DI) was 0.46 ± 0.17 and in the Dis-UTAD 0.46 ± 0.16; the mean DI differences was 0.001 ± 0.045, resulting in a non-significant paired t-test (P = 0.65) and a significant intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96, with the 95% lower limit confidence interval of 0.95 (P < 0.05). The statistical power analysis showed a very low distraction index difference effect size. The results suggest that the statistical reproducibility of CertD hip distraction by the Dis-UTAD and the DI mean differences of 0.001 might be considered without clinical importance. The Dis-UTAD might be considered adequate to promote dog hip laxity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7466428
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74664282020-09-23 Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs Santana, Ana Alves-Pimenta, Sofia Martins, João Colaço, Bruno Ginja, Mário Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science Canine hip dysplasia is the most common orthopedic developmental condition in the dog and early hip laxity is the main risk factor. The importance of hip laxity in young animals in the development of hip dysplasia is unanimously recognized among researchers and veterinarians due to its medical applicability in terms of disease control and prevention. In the market, there is some certified hip distractors to promote joint laxity. However, the clinical use of some of these distractors complies with a set of usage rules, that can limit its medical application. In this study was compared the technical quality of radiographs and hip distraction using a certified hip distractor (CertD) and Dis-UTAD in 104 dogs (208 joints). The mean pelvic tilting of 1.5 ± 1.6° and 1.5 ± 1.8° were similar when using the CertD and the Dis-UTAD distractors, respectively (P > 0.05). In the CertD sample, the mean hip distraction index (DI) was 0.46 ± 0.17 and in the Dis-UTAD 0.46 ± 0.16; the mean DI differences was 0.001 ± 0.045, resulting in a non-significant paired t-test (P = 0.65) and a significant intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96, with the 95% lower limit confidence interval of 0.95 (P < 0.05). The statistical power analysis showed a very low distraction index difference effect size. The results suggest that the statistical reproducibility of CertD hip distraction by the Dis-UTAD and the DI mean differences of 0.001 might be considered without clinical importance. The Dis-UTAD might be considered adequate to promote dog hip laxity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7466428/ /pubmed/32974397 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00491 Text en Copyright © 2020 Santana, Alves-Pimenta, Martins, Colaço and Ginja. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Santana, Ana
Alves-Pimenta, Sofia
Martins, João
Colaço, Bruno
Ginja, Mário
Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title_full Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title_fullStr Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title_short Comparison of Two Distraction Devices for Assessment of Passive Hip Laxity in Dogs
title_sort comparison of two distraction devices for assessment of passive hip laxity in dogs
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7466428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32974397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00491
work_keys_str_mv AT santanaana comparisonoftwodistractiondevicesforassessmentofpassivehiplaxityindogs
AT alvespimentasofia comparisonoftwodistractiondevicesforassessmentofpassivehiplaxityindogs
AT martinsjoao comparisonoftwodistractiondevicesforassessmentofpassivehiplaxityindogs
AT colacobruno comparisonoftwodistractiondevicesforassessmentofpassivehiplaxityindogs
AT ginjamario comparisonoftwodistractiondevicesforassessmentofpassivehiplaxityindogs