Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27286675›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016

Clinically important improvement thresholds for Harris Hip Score and its ability to predict revision risk after primary total hip arthroplasty.

Jasvinder A Singh, Cathy Schleck, Scott Harmsen, David Lewallen

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 114 papers, 21 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed, 21 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT05357378 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Safety and Effectiveness of the Hip Innovation Technology Reverse Hip Replacement System in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Pivotal Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorHip Innovation TechnologyRan2022 to 2035Enrolled288ConditionsDegenerative Joint Disease, Osteoarthritis, Hip, Avascular Necrosis of Hip, Traumatic Arthropathy-HipArmsHip Innovation Technology Reverse Hip Replacement System, Already-marketed semi-constrained uncemented hip systems using a metal-on-XLPE or ceramic-on-XLPE bearing combination.
NCT06221709 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Continuous Radiofrequency in Hip Osteoarthritis Pain: A Protocol of a Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of BrasiliaRan2024 to 2027Enrolled70ConditionsHip Osteoarthritis, Hip Pain ChronicArmsConventional Radiofrequency (CRF group), Intraarticular Infiltration ( Control group)
NCT06792539 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Multi-Center, Prospective, Non-Randomized, Pivotal Trial Evaluating the Safety and Effectiveness of the Polymotion Hip Resurfacing System

TypeinterventionalSponsorJointMedica Inc.Ran2025 to 2028Enrolled238ConditionsOsteoarthritis of the Hip, Degenerative Joint Disease of Hip, Dysplasia, HipArmsPolymotion Hip Resurfacing (PHR) System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

114 citing papers in PubMed, 21 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 245 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Imageless navigation for primary total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2022
    Pooled it
  18. Arthroplasties for hip fracture in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. The cement-in-cement technique is a reliable option in hip arthroplasty revision surgery: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2021
    Pooled it

54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jasvinder A SinghDepartment of Medicine, Medicine Service, Birmingham VA Medical Center, University of Alabama, Faculty Office Tower 805B, 510 20th Street S, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA. Jasvinder.md@gmail.com.
Cathy SchleckDepartments of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
Scott HarmsenDepartments of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
David LewallenCenter for Surgical Medical Acute care Research and Transitions (C-SMART), Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Mayo Clinic · USStart Making A Reader Today · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome aspects of validity are missing for the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Our objective was to examine the clinically meaningful change thresholds, responsiveness and the predictive ability of the HHS questionnaire.

methodsWe included a cohort of patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and responded to the HHS preoperatively and at 2- or 5-year post-THA (change score) to examine the clinically meaningful change thresholds (Minimal clinically important improvement, MCII; and moderate improvement), responsiveness (effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM)) based on pre- to post-operative change and the predictive ability of change score or absolute postoperative score at 2- and 5-years post-THA for future revision.

resultsTwo thousand six hundred sixty-seven patients with a mean age of 64 years completed baseline HHS; 1036 completed both baseline and 2-year HHS and 669 both baseline and 5-year HHS. MCII and moderate improvement thresholds ranged 15.9-18 points and 39.6-40.1 points, respectively. ES was 3.12 and 3.02 at 2- and 5-years; respective SRM was 2.73 and 2.52. There were 3195 hips with HHS scores at 2-years and 2699 hips with HHS scores at 5-years (regardless of the completion of baseline HHS; absolute postoperative scores). Compared to patients with absolute HHS scores of 81-100 (score range, 0-100), patients with scores <55 at 2- and 5-years had higher hazards (95 % confidence interval) of subsequent revision, 4.34 (2.14, 7.95; p < 0.001) and 3.08 (1.45, 5.84; p = 0.002), respectively. Compared to HHS score improvement of  >50 points from preoperative to 2-years post-THA, lack of improvement/worsening or 1-20 point improvement were associated with increased hazards of revision, 18.10 (1.41, 234.83; p = 0.02); and 6.21 (0.81, 60.73; p = 0.10), respectively.

conclusionsHHS is a valid measure of THA outcomes and is responsive to change. Both absolute HHS postoperative scores and HHS score change postoperatively are predictive of revision risk post-primary THA. We defined MCID and moderate improvement thresholds for HHS in this study.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHip JointHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, HipPostoperative PeriodPredictive Value of TestsPreoperative PeriodReoperationSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeClinically important improvementDiscriminant abilityHarris Hip ScoreMCIDMCIIMinimal clinically important differenceMinimal clinically important improvementPredictabilityResponsivenessTotal Hip Arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID27286675
PMCPMC4901425
OpenAlexW2409295794

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.