Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2014
The effect of posterior and lateral approach on patient-reported outcome measures and physical function in patients with osteoarthritis, undergoing total hip replacement: a randomised controlled trial protocol.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01616667 (Posterior Approach Versus Lateral Approach in Osteoarthritis Patients, With Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. The Effect on Early Physical Function, Pain, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Gait and Muscle Weakness A Randomized Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Posterior Approach Versus Lateral Approach in Osteoarthritis Patients, With Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. The Effect on Early Physical Function, Pain, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Gait and Muscle Weakness A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Patient-reported outcome after total hip arthroplasty: comparison between lateral and posterior approach.Acta orthopaedica · 2017Trial
- Effect of Total Hip Arthroplasty on Ipsilateral Lower Limb Alignment and Knee Joint Space Width: Minimum 5-Year Follow-up.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- The Recovery of Weight-Bearing Symmetry After Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Activity-Dependent.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Posterior versus lateral surgical approach: functionality and quality of life after total hip arthroplasty in a matched cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Comparison of Constrained Acetabular Components and Dual Mobility Cups in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Literature Review.Hip & pelvis · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTotal hip replacement provides pain relief and improves physical function and quality of life in patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. The incidence of hip replacement operations is expected to increase due to the growing elderly population. Overall, the posterior approach and lateral approach are the two most commonly used approaches for hip replacement operations. The posterior approach is associated with an increased risk of revision due to dislocations, and some studies have shown that the lateral approach is associated with reduced patient-reported outcomes, including physical function and pain; however, this has not been investigated in a randomised controlled trial with a twelve-month follow-up. We hypothesized that the lateral approach has an inferior outcome in patient-reported outcome compared with the posterior approach after one year. METHODS/
designThe trial is a prospective, double blinded, parallel-group controlled trial with balanced randomisation [1: 1]. Patients with hip osteoarthritis scheduled for hip replacement surgery, aged 45-70 years, will be consecutively recruited and randomised into two groups. Group A will receive hip replacement using the posterior approach, and Group B will receive hip replacement using the lateral approach. The primary end-point for assessing the outcome of the two interventions will be twelve months after surgery. Follow-up will also be performed after three and six months. The primary outcome is Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, subscale of "Physical function Short form" (HOOS-PS) Secondary outcome measures include two other subscales of HOOS ("Pain" and "Hip related Quality of Life"), physical activity level (UCLA activity score), limping (HHS) and general health status (EQ-5D-3L). Explorative outcomes include physical function test, 3D-gait-analysis and muscle strength. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first randomised controlled trial comparing the posterior approach with the lateral approach with patient reported outcome as the primary outcome and with a twelve-month follow-up.
trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov: NCT01616667.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.