ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Effect of liner geometry on jumping distance: as relevant as head size.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDislocation is a common complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Previously, we found that different liner models provided varying degrees of articulating head coverage. Jumping distance (JD) is a key indicator of joint stability. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the differences in JD values among various liner models.
methodsJD values were determined using previously published articulating head coverage data for 25 modular polyethylene liners used in 6 uncemented cup designs from 4 major manufacturers using a mathematical model. For each liner, the average values corresponding to each femoral head size within each cup size were used in the analysis.
resultsWithin the safe zone (5–25° anteversion and 30–50° inclination), average JD values ranged from 10.79 to 17.29 mm, depending on cup positioning, liner design, and femoral head size. On average, enlarging the femoral head size from 28 to 36 mm resulted in a 3.53 mm increase in JD within the safe zone. The JD variation between different liner designs was of the same magnitude as the effect of increasing the femoral head size from 28 to 36 mm: 3.16 mm with 32 mm and 3.32 mm with 36 mm femoral heads. The JD of the liner with the lowest coverage combined with a 36 mm femoral head was lower than that of the liner providing the greatest coverage, even when coupled with a 28 mm femoral head.
conclusionsLiner design can influence JD to a degree comparable to increasing femoral head size from 28 to 36 mm. Among the evaluated designs, liners providing greater coverage, such as the X3, yielded higher JD values for the same femoral head size. As optimal joint stability cannot be ensured solely by selecting a larger head size, liner geometry should be carefully considered alongside head size in THA component selection.
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.