ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Variability in United States online rehabilitation protocols after open and endoscopic hip abductor repair.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate readily accessible U.S. based online physical therapy protocols for open and endoscopic hip abductor repairs and to assess the variability in post-operative rehabilitation protocols.
methodsOnline physical therapy protocols from U.S. based orthopaedic institutions for gluteus medius/minimus repair were collected using a web-based query utilizing search terms "hip abductor repair rehabilitation protocol" and "gluteus repair rehabilitation protocol." Published protocols from both Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) academic orthopaedic surgery programs and private groups were collected. All publicly available protocols were included. Protocols were analyzed using a standardized spreadsheet to assess rehabilitation components and timelines. Descriptive statistics (median values, percentages, ranges) were calculated.
results54 rehabilitation protocols were assessed, including 22 (41%) from ERAS-affiliated academic programs or associated physicians. Postoperative weight-bearing was addressed in 53/54 (98%) protocols, with 41 (77%) recommending toe-touch/touchdown/flat-foot/20-lb weightbearing. Median duration of restricted weight-bearing was 6 weeks (range, 2-8 weeks). Regarding range of motion restrictions, 37 (69%) protocols limited hip flexion to 90°, 42 (78%) advised against passive adduction past neutral, and 49 (91%) against active abduction. Bracing was recommended in 30 (56%) protocols, with 25 (83%) lacking brace specification and only 5 (17%) recommending an abduction brace. Return-to-sport timelines were included in 19 (35%) protocols, with a median 16 weeks (range 12-24). Functional testing was mentioned in 22 (41%) protocols, though tests and criteria varied.
conclusionSubstantial variability exists in the composition and timing of rehabilitation protocols following hip abductor tendon repair. A majority of protocols advised limited weight bearing for the first 6 weeks after surgery and avoidance of active hip abduction and passive hip adduction, however there was wide variation in the recommendations regarding brace use, strengthening progressions, the role of functional testing, and the timeline for return to activity and sport.
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.