The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform Does Not Adequately Represent Physical Functioning in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES: A frequently used patient-reported outcome measure for assessing physical functioning in patients with hip problems is the 5-item Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS). Nevertheless, its content validity (whether this instrument adequately reflects the construct of physical functioning) is unknown. This study aimed to assess the content validity of the HOOS-PS. METHODS: A quantitative and qualitative research approach was used. Physical functioning was defined as the ability to perform activities that require physical actions, ranging from self-care to more complex activities that require a combination of skills, often within a social context. Patients (n = 51) and experts (n = 25) completed questionnaires regarding the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the HOOS-PS. Semistructured interviews (n = 5) explored issues identified in the quantitative data in more depth. Thematic content analysis was conducted using a coding frame. RESULTS: One of the 5 items was considered relevant to measure physical functioning. Comprehensiveness was considered insufficient by both patients and experts. Furthermore, comprehensibility was considered inadequate. Several items were found ambiguous or double barreled. Regarding interpretability, floor or ceiling effects were not found. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed concerns about the content validity of the HOOS-PS: most items are considered not relevant, the HOOS-PS is considered not comprehensive, and several items are considered not comprehensible. These findings challenge the applicability of the HOOS-PS in clinical practice, research, value-based healthcare, and benchmarking.

Bridging therapy for oral anticoagulation increases the risk for bleeding-related complications in total joint arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patients scheduled for elective surgery with a high risk of thromboembolism require anticoagulation bridging therapy perioperatively. The purpose of this study was to assess the risk of thromboembolic events and bleeding-related complications after total hip and knee arthroplasty in patients requiring bridging therapy for anticoagulants. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all patients with primary total hip or total knee replacement in a 4-year period was performed. Outcome measures were blood loss, thromboembolic and bleeding-related complications and hospital stay. RESULTS: Bridged patients had more blood loss and higher complication rates than the control group. Most complications were bleeding-related, and there were no thromboembolic events. Seven of the 14 (50%) total hip patients bridged with unfractioned heparin required reoperation (three patients with ischial neuropraxia due to hematoma). There were two bleeding-related deaths in total hip patients bridged with low-molecular-weight heparin. Mean hospital stay was significantly longer in unfractioned heparin bridging. CONCLUSION: In this study, there was a significant increase in bleeding-related complications in total joint replacement with bridging therapy compared to prophylaxis. This risk was highest in patients with total hip arthroplasty. There were no thromboembolic events in bridged patients.

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is claimed to allow higher activity levels and to give better quality of life than total hip arthroplasty. In this literature review, we assessed the therapeutic value of hip resurfacing arthroplasty as measured by functional outcome. METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. RESULTS: 9 patient series, 1 case-control study, and 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included. Clinically and statistically significant improvement in sporting activity and hip scores were found in 10 studies. INTERPRETATION: Studies with low levels of evidence have shown improvement in various different hip scores and one RCT showed better outcomes with hip resurfacing arthroplasty. There is no high-level evidence to prove that there is improved clinical outcome using hip resurfacing arthroplasty. More randomized research needs to be done.