Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25298243›Full record

Trial reportTrials2014

Effect of percutaneous assisted approach on functional rehabilitation for total hip replacement compared to anterolateral approach: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Claudia Hendrickx, Willem De Hertogh, Ulrike Van Daele, Peter Mertens, Gaetane Stassijns

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02032017 (Percutaneous Assisted Approach for Total Hip Replacement and it's Effect on Functional Rehabilitation Compared to the Anterolateral Approach.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02032017 naunknown statusnot on this map

Percutaneous Assisted Approach for Total Hip Replacement and it's Effect on Functional Rehabilitation Compared to the Anterolateral Approach.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversiteit AntwerpenRan2013Enrolled30ConditionsTotal Hip ArthroplastyArmsCeramic on ceramic couple, Percutaneous assisted approach, Anterolateral approach, Usual care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudia Hendrickx
Willem De HertoghFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium. willem.dehertogh@uantwerpen.be.
Ulrike Van Daele
Peter Mertens
Gaetane Stassijns
University of Antwerp · BEZNA Middelheim Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe anterolateral approach is a commonly used technique for total hip replacement. It requires the detachment of a large part of the gluteus medius muscle. However, it is known that this muscle has a great impact on hip stability. Using the percutaneous assisted approach the damage to the gluteus medius can be limited. The purpose of this study is to compare the effect of the percutaneous assisted approach with the anterolateral approach on postoperative functional outcome. METHODS/

designThis study uses a prospective, randomized, parallel-group design with blinded assessment and unblinded treatment to compare the percutaneous assisted approach with the anterolateral approach in total hip replacement surgery. The postoperative results of patients operated on using the percutaneous assisted approach will be compared with those of patients operated on using the anterolateral approach. Prior to surgery patients will undergo baseline measurements. These will consist of gluteus medius measurements (surface-electromyography, strength measurements of abductors and quadriceps and the Trendelenburg test), questionnaires (Oxford Hip Score and 36-item Short Form Health Survey) and functional measures (the Timed Get-Up-and-Go test, Five times Sit-to-Stand test and Six-Minute Walk test). These measurements will be repeated four and 12 weeks after surgery. After surgery both groups will receive usual care. DISCUSSION: The gluteus medius is the main stabilizer of the hip joint. Therefore, we assume that functional outcome and gluteus medius function of patients after the percutaneous assisted approach will be better than after the anterolateral approach.

trial registrationThis trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 8 January 2014, registration number: NCT02032017.

Indexed as

Research DesignArthroplasty, Replacement, HipBelgiumBiomechanical PhenomenaButtocksClinical ProtocolsElectromyographyExercise TestHip JointHumansJoint InstabilityMuscle, SkeletalProspective StudiesRecovery of FunctionSurveys and QuestionnairesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID25298243
PMCPMC4197322
OpenAlexW2143689255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.