Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30834267›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2019

Predicting Outcome after Total Hip Arthroplasty: The Role of Preoperative Patient-Reported Measures.

Markus Weber, Florian Zeman, Benjamin Craiovan, Max Thieme, Moritz Kaiser, Michael Woerner, Joachim Grifka, Tobias Renkawitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Markus WeberDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8203-0382
Florian ZemanCenter of Clinical Studies, Regensburg University Medical Center, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8425-984X
Benjamin CraiovanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Max ThiemeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Moritz KaiserDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Michael WoernerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Joachim GrifkaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.
Tobias RenkawitzDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Regensburg University Medical Center, Bad Abbach, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Choosing the appropriate patient for surgery is crucial for good outcome in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Therefore, parameters predicting outcome preoperatively are of major interest. In the current study, we compared the predictive power of different presurgical measures in minimally invasive THA. In the course of a prospective clinical trial preoperative HOOS, EQ-5D and SF-36 were obtained in 140 patients undergoing THA. Responder rate was defined by the modified OMERACT-OARSI criteria at six-month-, one-year, two-year, and three-year follow-up. Logistic regression was performed to compare the different questionnaires regarding their power of predicting positive responders. ROC-curve analysis was used to define benchmarks in preoperative measures associated with good outcome. Preoperative HOOS (p<0.001), EQ-5D (p=0.007), and PCS of SF-36 (p<0.001) were higher in responders than in nonresponders whereas no differences between responders and nonresponders were found for preoperative MCS (p=0.96) of SF-36. However, preoperative HOOS revealed best predictive power (OR=0.84 95%CI=0.78-0.90, p<0.001, Pseudo R-Squared according to Nagelkerke=0.48, effect size according to Cohen=0.96) compared to all other preoperative measures. Multivariable analysis confirmed preoperative HOOS as an independent parameter correlating with postoperative responder status (OR=0.76, 95% CI=0.66-0.88, p<0.001). In ROC-curve analysis nonresponders were identified with a sensitivity of 91.7% and specificity of 68.9% using a cutoff in preoperative HOOS of 40.3. Presurgical HOOS can predict outcome in THA better than other preoperative outcome measures. Patients with a preoperative HOOS value less than 40.3 have the highest probability of a positive response in terms of pain and function after THA.

Indexed as

PrognosisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemaleHipHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPain MeasurementPatient SatisfactionPreoperative PeriodQuality of LifeRecovery of Function

Identifiers

PMID30834267
PMCPMC6374818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.