Trial reportMusculoskeletal surgery2017
Comparison of clinical results and patient's satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty in a community hospital.
Trial report in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Postoperative Results Differ in a Randomized Trial Between a Direct Anterior and a Direct Lateral Approach in THA?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Trial
- Statistical models and implant customization in hip arthroplasty: Seeking patient satisfaction through design.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Direct Anterior versus Lateral Approach for Femoral Neck Fracture: Role in COVID-19 Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Direct anterior approach and dual mobility cup: the "head-first" reduction technique: a technical note and early case series.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2021Article
- Transitioning the total hip arthroplasty technique from posterior approach in lateral position to direct anterior approach in supine position-risk factors for acetabular malpositioning and the learning curve.International orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Total hip arthroplasty performed by direct anterior approach - Does experience influence the learning curve?SICOT-J · 2020Article
- Adopting the direct anterior approach: experience and learning curve in a Chinese patient population.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAim of the study is to compare clinical results and patient's satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty.
methodsA group of 30 patients operated with DAA (group B) were compared to 39 patients operated by Hardinge approach (group A). Peri- and postoperative complications, Harris Hip Score (HHS), implant positioning, experienced pain and patient satisfaction were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 30 months.
resultsHHS at follow-up was significantly better in group B (92.2 ± 11.9 vs 95.2 ± 4.5 p = 0.04 Student's t test). There was no difference in femoral stem positioning while cup inclination was significantly better in group B (40.6° ± 6.6° vs 44.3° ± 7.9°, p = 0.04 Student's t test). Overall pain recalled by patients was significantly lower in group B.
conclusionThe introduction of DAA does not affect patients' final outcome but comes with comparable functional recovery and greater patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28452043What 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.