ArticleJournal of children's orthopaedics2022
Clinical examination and patients' history are not suitable for neonatal hip screening.
Article in Journal of children's orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated Neonatal Hip Ultrasound System for Diagnosing Developmental Dysplasia of Hips Using Assistive AI.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Universal ultrasound screening and early treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a critical review.Journal of medicine and life · 2024Review
- [Clinical aspects of imaging the hip in infants, children and adolescents].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Risk factors for misdiagnosis in children with developmental dysplasia of the hip: a retrospective single centre study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2023Article
- Reforms Needed.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023Article
- 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the percentage of missed developmental dysplasia of the hip, which escape the German criteria for newborn hip high-risk screening, we analyzed our data gained from the general neonatal sonographic hip screening performed at our department. The aim of the study was to determine the number of potentially belatedly treated developmental dysplasia of the hip. Methods: The data from 1145 standardized newborn hip ultrasound examinations according to the Graf technique were analyzed retrospectively comparing findings for general neonatal sonographic hip screening and high-risk screening subgroups. Results: We diagnosed developmental dysplasia of the hip in 18 of the 1145 newborns via ultrasound. A total of 10 out of 18 developmental dysplasia of the hip would have been missed by high-risk screening, which corresponds to a proportion of 55.6% false-negative results. The sensitivity of high-risk screening was only 44.4% and specificity, 78.3%. The positive predictive value was 3.2%. Family history as a screening criterion yielded false-negative results in 77.8% and false-positive results in 16.8%. In all, 83.3% of the children who were born with developmental dysplasia of the hip but not from breech position as a risk factor were false negative. The clinical examination was false negative in 88.9% and false positive in 0.6%. Conclusion: High-risk screening detected less than every second developmental dysplasia of the hip, rendering the first month as the most effective treatment window unavailable for inapparent dysplastic hips, potentially resulting in the need for more invasive treatment. Due to the high sensitivity of ultrasound in the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip, we recommend to replace the current German high-risk screening guidelines with a general newborn screening for all neonates using Graf ultrasound in the first week of life. Level of evidence: Level II.
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.