Patients' perception of leg length discrepancy post total hip arthroplasty.

Perception of a leg length discrepancy post total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most common sources of patient dissatisfaction and can have a direct influence on the considered success of the operation.This research examined postoperative perception of imposed limb discrepancies in a group of THA patients compared to a group of participants with no previous hip surgery. Two subgroups of THA patients were involved: those who did not perceive a difference in limb length following THA and those that did.Discrepancies were imposed in 2.5 mm increments. For discrepancies ≥5 mm, a significant number of participants were aware of a difference (74%). There was no significant difference in perception of imposed discrepancies between THA patients and participants with no previous hip surgery. THA patients who perceived a difference in their limb lengths postoperatively had significantly worse pain and oxford scores when compared to THA patients who perceived their limb lengths to be equal. Knowing the boundaries between LLDs that go undetected and those that patients are aware of could guide surgeons when evaluating the balance between correct soft tissue tension and the resulting unequal leg length. From these findings, discrepancies >5 mm are likely to be perceived. Whether this perception would lead directly to a negative outcome score and patient dissatisfaction is more complex to project and likely to be patient specific. Intraoperative methods to aid the controlled positioning of implanted components could help maintain and restore leg length to within an acceptable amount that patients cannot perceive.

Does a standard outpatient physiotherapy regime improve the range of knee motion after primary total knee arthroplasty?

The aim of this study was to investigate whether a standard course of outpatient physiotherapy improves the range of knee motion after primary total knee arthroplasty. One hundred and fifty patients were randomly assigned into one of 2 groups. One group received outpatient physiotherapy for 6 weeks (group A). Another received no outpatient physiotherapy (group B). Range of knee motion was measured preoperatively and at 1-year review. Validated knee scores and an SF-12 health questionnaire were also recorded. Although patients in group A achieved a greater range of knee motion than those in group B, this was not statistically significant. No difference either was noted in any of the outcome measures used. In conclusion, outpatient physiotherapy does not improve the range of knee motion after primary total knee arthroplasty.

Comparison of early postoperative functional levels following total hip replacement using minimally invasive versus standard incisions. A prospective randomized blinded trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of single-incision minimally invasive total hip replacement (< or = 10 cm) to standard-incision (16 cm) total hip replacement in the early postoperative period with respect to functional and mobilizing ability (transfers, mobilizing, walking and stair assessment). SETTING: Orthopaedic wards of a regional orthopaedic centre. SUBJECTS: Two hundred and nineteen total hip replacement patients were tested between December 2003 and June 2004. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to either total hip replacement through a minimally invasive (< or = 10 cm) or standard incision (16 cm). A single surgeon performed all procedures using the same type of component fixation. Postoperative physiotherapy assessment and treatment was standardized. Analgesia was also standardized. All patients, physiotherapy staff and assessors were blinded to the incision used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients were tested two days post operatively and were assessed for the following activities: transfer from supine to sit, transfer from sitting to standing, mobilizing, ascending and descending stairs and weight-bearing. RESULTS: The shorter incision offered no significant improvement in patient ability in relation to transfer from lying to sitting, transfer from sitting to standing, mobilizing or weight-bearing. Ascending/descending stairs gave a total time for the minimal incision of 38.7 s against 40.8 s for a standard incision. There was no difference in walking velocity between the standard incision and minimal incision groups two days post operatively (minimal incision = 0.26 m/s versus standard incision = 0.26 m/s) or six weeks post operatively (minimal incision = 0.90 m/s versus standard incision = 0.93 m/s). There was no difference between groups with respect to walking aids at six-week review. The mean length of stay for the minimally invasive approach was 3.65 days (SD 2.04) against 3.68 days (SD 2.45) for the standard approach. This was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Total hip replacement performed through a minimally invasive incision of < or = 10 cm compared with a standard incision of 16 cm offers no significant benefit in terms of the rate or ability of patients to mobilize and perform functional tasks necessary for safe discharge.

A minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty does not improve early postoperative outcomes. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty has stirred substantial controversy with regard to whether it provides superior outcomes compared with total hip arthroplasty performed through longer incisions. The orthopaedic literature is deficient in well-designed scientific studies to support the clinical superiority of this approach. The objective of this study was to compare the results of a single mini-incision approach with those of a standard-incision total hip arthroplasty in the early postoperative period. METHODS: Two hundred and nineteen patients (219 hips) admitted for unilateral total hip arthroplasty between December 2003 and June 2004 were randomized to undergo surgery through a short incision of