Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28630719›Full record

ArticleJournal of hip preservation surgery2017

Hip arthroscopy results in improved patient reported outcomes compared to non-operative management of waitlisted patients.

Luke Spencer-Gardner, Ruch Dissanayake, Amir Kalanie, Parminder Singh, John O'Donnell

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hip preservation surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Immediate Versus Delayed Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement: An Expected Value Decision Analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Luke Spencer-GardnerThe Hip Preservation Center, Baylor University Medical Center, 3900 Junius Street, #705, Dallas, TX 75246, USA.
Ruch DissanayakeEastern Health 8 Arnold St, Box Hill, VIC 3128, Australia.
Amir KalanieSt. Vincent's Private Hospital, Suite 901A St Vincent's Clinic 438 Victoria Street, Darlinghurst, NSW 2010, Australia.
Parminder SinghHip Arthroscopy Australia, 21 Erin Street, Richmond, VIC 3121, Australia.
John O'DonnellHip Arthroscopy Australia, 21 Erin Street, Richmond, VIC 3121, Australia.
Arthritis Australia · AUBaylor University Medical Center · USEastern Health · AUSt Vincent's Clinic · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hip arthroscopy (HA) is an established treatment option to address intra-articular pathology of the hip. However, some clinicians encourage non-operative management (NOM). Non-operative management may include active measures such as physiotherapy and intra-articular steroid injections, or NOM may involve so called watchful waiting with no active intervention. These approaches, along with surgery have been detailed recently in the Warwick Agreement, a Consensus Statement regarding diagnosis and treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome The aim of this study is to compare the change in clinical outcome scores of waitlisted patients with intra-articular hip pathology who receive no active treatment with matched controls that have undergone HA. Patients less than 60 years of age were identified from a HA waiting list in a single hospital in the Australian public hospital system. Patient reported outcomes (PRO) were collected whilst patients waited for surgery. During this waiting period no specific treatment was offered. A separate group of patients who had previously undergone HA were matched based on age, sex, body mass index and baseline non-arthritic hip scores (NAHS). The groups were compared using the NAHS as the primary outcome measures. Modified Harris Hip Scores were also collected and compared. Thirty-six patients were included in each group, with a mean follow up of 19 months (12-36). There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI and NAHS between groups at baseline. At final follow up, mean NAHS scores after HA were significantly higher than scores after NOM, 82.1 (36.4-100.0) versus 48.9 (11.3-78.8), respectively (

Identifiers

PMID28630719
PMCPMC5467427
OpenAlexW2570481395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.