Psychometric Properties of the Hip-Return to Sport After Injury Scale (Short Form) for Evaluating Psychological Readiness to Return to Sports After Arthroscopic Hip Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Successful return to sports activity after surgery requires both physical and psychological readiness. The Hip-Return to Sport After Injury (Short Form) has been developed to assess psychological readiness to return to sports after hip injury and hip surgery, including hip arthroscopy. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the scale for a cohort of patients after hip arthroscopy with a range of sports participation levels. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Invitations to participate were sent to 145 patients from 3 specialist surgeons. The study included 77 participants 1 to 24 months after hip arthroscopy (mean ± SD age, 35 ± 9 years; 62% women) and 33 healthy age-matched controls (age, 37 ± 7 years; 52% women). The scale was administered electronically on 3 occasions to patients: baseline (≥1 month postarthroscopy), 1 week later, and 6 months later. In addition to the scale, participants were asked about sports participation status and their global rating of postsurgical change. The scale was administered to healthy controls on 1 occasion. The minimal detectable difference, discriminant validity, floor and ceiling effects, responsiveness, and interpretability (minimally important change) were determined for the scale. RESULTS: Among the postarthroscopy group, excellent test-retest reliability was found (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.869; 95% CI, 0.756-0.932) with a minimal detectable difference of 26 points out of 100 at the individual level and 4 points out of 100 at the group level. At baseline discriminant validity was evident between those who had returned to sports (median = 69, n = 35) and those who had not returned to sports (median = 30, n = 42; Mann-Whitney U score = 232.5, z = -5.141, P < .001) and between the returned-to-sports postarthroscopy group and healthy controls (median = 96, n = 33; Mann-Whitney U score = 165.500, z = 5.666, P < .001). No floor or ceiling effects were evident. Responsiveness was demonstrated for the scale in relation to sports status. With sports status as an anchor, a minimally important change of 26 points was identified. CONCLUSION: Assessment of the Hip-Return to Sport After Injury (Short Form) supports its use as a reliable and valid measure of psychological readiness to return to sports in patients after hip arthroscopy.

Patients With Chondrolabral Pathology Have Bilateral Functional Impairments 12 to 24 Months After Unilateral Hip Arthroscopy: A Cross-sectional Study.

Study Design Cross-sectional study. Background Functional task performance in patients with chondrolabral pathology following hip arthroscopy is unknown. Objectives To investigate in people with chondrolabral pathology following hip arthroscopy (1) the bilateral differences in functional task performance compared to controls, (2) the association of hip muscle strength with functional task performance, and (3) the association of functional task performance scores with good outcome, as measured by International Hip Outcome Tool score. Methods Seventy-one patients who had unilateral hip arthroscopy for hip pain and 60 controls were recruited. Patient-reported outcomes included the 4 subscales of the International Hip Outcome Tool. Hip muscle strength measures included abduction, adduction, extension, flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation. Functional tasks assessed included the single hop test, the side bridge test, and the single-leg rise test. For aim 1, analyses of covariance tests were used. For aim 2, stepwise multiple linear regression analyses were used. For aim 3, receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were used. Results Compared to controls, the chondrolabral pathology group had significantly worse performance on both legs for each of the functional tasks (P<.001). Greater hip abduction strength was moderately associated with better performance on functional tasks in the chondrolabral pathology group (adjusted R2 range, 0.197-0.407; P<.001). Cutoff values associated with good outcome were 0.37 (hop distance/height) for the single hop, 16 repetitions for the single-leg rise, and 34 seconds for the side bridge test. Conclusion Patients with hip chondrolabral pathology had reduced functional task performance bilaterally 12 to 24 months after unilateral hip arthroscopy when compared to controls. Level of Evidence Therapy/symptom prevalence, level 3b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46(11):947-956. doi:10.2519/jospt.2016.6577.

Is quality of life following hip arthroscopy in patients with chondrolabral pathology associated with impairments in hip strength or range of motion?

INTRODUCTION: If physical impairments that are associated with poorer outcomes can be identified in people with chondrolabral hip pathology, then rehabilitation programmes that target such modifiable impairments could potentially be established to improve quality of life. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between quality-of-life PROs and physical impairment measurements in people with chondrolabral pathology post-hip arthroscopic surgery. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study where multiple stepwise linear regression analyses were conducted to determine which physical impairment measurements were most associated with poorer quality-of-life patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Eighty-four patients (42 women; all aged 36 ± 10 years) with hip chondrolabral pathology 12- to 24-month post-hip arthroscopy were included. The Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Quality-of-life (HOOS-Q) subscale and International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT-33) PROs were collected. Measurements of active hip ROM and strength were assessed. RESULTS: Modifiable post-surgical physical impairments were associated with PRO in patients with chondrolabral pathology. Greater hip flexion ROM was independently associated with better scores in both HOOS-Q and IHOT-33 (adjusted r 2 values ranged from 0.249 to 0.341). Greater hip adduction strength was independently associated with better HOOS-Q and IHOT-33 (adjusted r 2 0.227-0.317). Receiver Operator Curve analyses determined that the limit value for hip flexion ROM was 100° (sensitivity 92 %, specificity 75 %), and hip adduction strength was 0.86 Nm/kg (sensitivity 96 %, specificity 70 %). CONCLUSIONS: Hip flexion ROM and adduction strength were associated with better quality-of-life PRO scores in patients with chondrolabral pathology 12- to 24-month post-hip arthroscopy. These impairments could be targeted by clinicians designing rehabilitation programmes to this patient group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional study, Level IV.

Hip chondropathy at arthroscopy: prevalence and relationship to labral pathology, femoroacetabular impingement and patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe chondropathy prevalence in adults who had undergone hip arthroscopy for hip pain. The relationships between chondropathy severity and (1) participant characteristics; and (2) patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at initial assessment (∼18 months postsurgery) and over a further 12 months (∼30 months postsurgery) were evaluated. Finally, the relationships between chondropathy and coexisting femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and labral pathology at the time of surgery were evaluated. METHODS: 100 consecutive patients (36±12 years) who underwent hip arthroscopy 18 months previously participated. Hip Osteoarthritis and Disability Outcome Score (HOOS) and International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) data were collected prospectively at 18 months postsurgery and at 30 months postsurgery. Surgical data were collected retrospectively. Participants were grouped: Outerbridge grade 0, no chondropathy; Outerbridge grade I-II, mild chondropathy; Outerbridge III-IV, severe chondropathy. The presence of FAI or labral pathology was noted. RESULTS: The prevalence of chondropathy (≥grade I) at hip arthroscopy was 72%. Participants with severe chondropathy were significantly worse for all HOOS subscales and the iHOT-33 at 18 months postsurgery (HOOS-symptoms (p=0.017); HOOS-pain (p=0.024); HOOS-activity (p=0.009); HOOS-sport (p=0.004); HOOS-quality-of-life (p=0.006); iHOT-33 (p=0.013)) than those with no chondropathy. At 12-month follow-up, HOOS-quality-of-life in those without chondropathy was the only PRO that improved. Relative risk of coexisting chondropathy with labral pathology or FAI was 40%. CONCLUSIONS: Chondropathy was prevalent, and associated with increasing age, coexisting labral pathology or FAI. Severe chondropathy was associated with worse pain and function at 18 months postsurgery. Little improvements were observed in participants over a further 12 months, regardless of chondropathy status.

Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: implications of prolonged waiting times for surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of surgical waiting times on patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), with emphasis on morbidity and costs incurred. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent cholecystectomy at the Launceston General Hospital between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2001 was performed. RESULTS: A total of 322 LCs was performed during the study period. Median time on the waiting list was 130 (1-1481) days. While awaiting surgery, 44/322 patients (14%) re-presented to the emergency department with biliary symptoms (89 separate presentations); 21 patients (6%) were admitted (28 admissions), of whom 18 (86%) were on the waiting list for biliary colic symptoms only. Reasons for emergency admission included pancreatitis (1), cholangitis (3), choledocholithiasis (7), cholecystitis (7), and exacerbation of symptoms (10). Median hospital stay was 4 days (1-14 days) (total cost of 124 hospital days, excluding subsequent admission for cholecystectomy, $A128 712 according to average bed day costs), and 11 patients required endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (13 procedures). Mean (median) time on the surgical waiting list for patients who developed complications was 238 (203) days versus 185 (126) days for patients who had LC without interval complications. A total of 198 cancellations occurred in 124/322 patients (39%) before surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged waiting times for elective LC are associated with morbidity in 14% of patients at the Launceston General Hospital. This, combined with frequent cancellation of elective surgery, may result in significant costs to the health-care sector.