ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness of the use of fixation mechanisms for hip replacement in patients with osteoarthritis or prosthesis revision, using explicit criteria. METHODS: Following the RAND appropriateness method, it was carried out a revision of the bibliography and was created a list of 12 indications for osteoarthritis and 32 for the revision. A panel of 27 experts, all of them traumatologists, punctuated the degree of appropriateness for each indication in a scale of 1 (completely inappropriate) up to 9 (completely appropriate). According to the median of the punctuations and the agreement level, each indication was classified as appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate. The data of ten public hospitals of medium and big size of the Basque Service of Health-Osakidetza, were picked up and the developed criteria were applied to the evaluated interventions. RESULTS: 831 osteoarthritis interventions and 349 revisions were evaluated. Of the 136 interventions in which the prosthesis used was cemented, in two thirds its use was considered appropriate. The cementless prosthesis was used more frequently (77%) and in most of the cases (94%) it was considered appropriate according to the criteria of the panel. Of the 68 acetabular revisions in which cemented prosthesis was used, in 85% of them the use of cementless mechanism was recommended. However, of the 134 interventions that used cementless, the panel agreed on 94%. Similar results happened with the femoral revision. CONCLUSIONS: The study offers some recommendations on the use of the cemented and cementless prosthesis, based on the work of a panel of experts. Once applied, the criteria of the panel a certain level of uncertain use is observed.
