ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
What would you do first? A survey of treatment priorities for patients with hip-spine syndrome among spine and hip surgeons.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeHip-spine syndrome refers to the coexistence of hip and spinal pathologies, complicating diagnosis and surgical decision-making. This study investigated how German hip and spine surgeons prioritize surgical sequence in hip-spine syndrome and compared these patterns with those previously reported among U.S. surgeons.
methodsA cross-sectional survey containing five standardized case scenarios of concurrent hip osteoarthritis and typical degenerative spinal disorders was distributed to members of the German Society for Joint Replacement and the German Spine Society. Respondents included orthopaedic hip surgeons, orthopaedic spine surgeons (OSS), and neurosurgical spine surgeons (NSS). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests, and qualitative comments were examined using text-mining and thematic synthesis. Findings were compared on a point-by-point basis with the published results of the original U.S. study.
resultsIn general, German surgeons recommended spine-first treatment when neurological deficits such as myelopathy or neurogenic claudication were present, and hip-first treatment in cases without neurological deficits. Preferences differed significantly among specialties, especially between NSS and OSS. Compared with U.S. respondents, German surgeons were more likely to prioritize spine-first procedures in scenarios involving neurogenic claudication. Decision-making was primarily driven by symptom severity, spine-pelvis-hip biomechanics, and perceived procedural risk, rather than by surgeons’ years of experience.
conclusionThe preferred order of surgery for patients with hip-spine syndrome varies with neurological status, surgeon specialty, and geographic context. These results underscore the importance of interdisciplinary communication and individualized, patient-centered strategies when formal treatment guidelines are lacking.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.