ArticleCureus2023
Stair Climbing Ability and Identification of the Nine Stairs Ascent and Descent Test Cut-Off Points in Hip Osteoarthritis Patients: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of hip bracing on stair walking biomechanics and pain in patients with mild-to-moderate hip osteoarthritis: an intervention study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Automatic prediction of obstructive sleep apnea in patients with temporomandibular disorder based on multidata and machine learning.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives As the prevalence and incidence of hip osteoarthritis (hip OA) continue to rise, measuring the impact of hip OA severity on a patient's functionality is essential. Stair walking is a particularly relevant task to assess hip OA patients, as difficulty with stair ascent is one of the driving factors in deciding to undergo a total hip arthroplasty. Although stairs tests often arise in post-arthroplasty measures, there is a lack of reported stairs performance time in hip OA patients. Therefore, this retrospective study aimed to report the stair performance time of hip OA patients categorized by disease severity and determine cut-off points that differentiate between severity grades. Materials and methods The patient selection was based on the review of de-identified data from our research laboratory database. 254 hip OA patients (aged ≥ 50 years) were divided according to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification system into three groups: Grade 2 (n=68), Grade 3 (n=109), and Grade 4 (n= 68). The stair-walking ability was evaluated using the 9S-A/D test. The time taken to ascend and descend the stairs was measured separately, and the total time (9S-A/D) was also recorded. The one-way ANOVA model, Welch test, Games-Howell posthoc test, Chi-Square tests, and Two-Way ANOVA model were used for the statistical analysis of the data. The cut-off points were obtained by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. The statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Results Homogeneity was found between the three groups regarding demographic and clinical characteristics, except age and gender (p<0.001). The comparison of the variables (9S-ascent, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D) between groups, adjusted for gender and age, showed significant differences: Grade 2 individuals had shorter performance times compared to those in Grade 3 and Grade 4 (p<0.005). Simultaneously, patients with Grade 3 hip OA have a shorter performance time than those with Grade 4 hip OA (p<0.005). Regarding ROC analysis of Grade 2 versus Grade 3: The AUCs of 9S-ascend, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D were 0.742 (95%CI 0.67-0.81), 0.734 (95%CI 0.66-0.81), and 0.745 (95%CI 0.54-0.90), respectively (all p values <0.005). The cut-off points of 9S-ascend, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D were 8.7 s (sensitivity 56%, specificity 88%), 7.1 s (sensitivity 58%, specificity 80%), and 16.25 s (sensitivity 54%, specificity 90%), respectively. Concerning ROC analysis of Grade 3 versus Grade 4: The AUCs of 9S-ascend, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D were 0.702 (95%CI 0.62-0.78), 0.711 (95%CI 0.63-0.79), and 0.715 (95%CI 0.64-0.80), respectively (all p values <0.005). The cut-off points of 9S-ascend, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D were 11.5 s (sensitivity 66%, specificity 65%), 8.3 s (sensitivity 71%, specificity 62%), and 19.05 s (sensitivity 71%, specificity 61%), respectively. Conclusions The study provides evidence that the progression of hip OA affected stair walking; the performance time of 9S-ascent, 9S-ascent, and 9S-A/D tests was significantly longer as the severity of hip OA worsened. ROC analysis results show tests' ability to distinguish the cut-off point between different hip OA grades. However, further research is required for the reporting and classification of stair performance time values in hip OA patients and to further investigate the ability of 9S-ascent, 9S-descent, and 9S-A/D tests to predict the grade of hip OA.
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.