ReviewInternational orthopaedics2026
A historical journey through developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH): from prehistoric evidence to the rise of modern diagnostic and therapeutic concepts.
Review in International orthopaedics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo review the historical evolution of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), tracing the progressive development of its anatomical, clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic concepts from prehistoric evidence to contemporary practice.
methodsAn extensive electronic search of the medical and historical literature was performed and complemented by manual review of archaeological, artistic, literary, and scientific sources. Historical reports describing congenital hip dislocation, neonatal instability, diagnostic methods, and treatment strategies were critically analysed within their scientific, cultural, and chronological contexts.
resultsThe history of DDH represents a continuous process of conceptual evolution rather than a succession of isolated discoveries. Palaeopathological evidence demonstrates the antiquity of the disorder, while the Hippocratic Corpus first distinguished congenital from traumatic hip dislocation. This knowledge was preserved through late antiquity and the medieval period before anatomical investigations by Ambroise Paré, Theodor Kerckring, Giovanni Battista Palletta, Guillame Dupuytren, and Willem Vrolik established its structural and pathological basis. During the nineteenth century, Wilhelm Roser and Friedrich Trendelenburg transformed DDH into a functional clinical disorder, whereas the introduction of radiography established its clinic-radiological identity. In the twentieth century, pioneering contributions by Codivilla, Putti, Hilgenreiner, Ortolani, and Barlow shifted attention towards neonatal instability, early diagnosis, and preventive treatment. Subsequently, Graf's ultrasonographic classification revolutionised imaging, while the Pavlik harness, and modern reconstructive surgery, such as the Chiari and Salter osteotomies, established the foundations of contemporary DDH management.
conclusionsThe historical evolution of DDH illustrates the progressive integration of empirical observation, anatomy, clinical examination, imaging, and surgery into a preventive, evidence-based discipline. Understanding this historical pathway provides valuable perspective on the principles that continue to guide modern diagnosis, treatment, and neonatal screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42631757What 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.