The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement

Standard

The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement. / Liebs, T R; Nasser, L; Herzberg, W; Ruether, Wolfgang; Hassenpflug, J.

In: BONE JOINT J, Vol. 96-B, No. 1, 01.01.2014, p. 36-42.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Liebs, TR, Nasser, L, Herzberg, W, Ruether, W & Hassenpflug, J 2014, 'The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement', BONE JOINT J, vol. 96-B, no. 1, pp. 36-42. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31530

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{a3dc33eb11e44adca2f24d0c2632cfd6,
title = "The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement",
abstract = "Several factors have been implicated in unsatisfactory results after total hip replacement (THR). We examined whether femoral offset, as measured on digitised post-operative radiographs, was associated with pain after THR. The routine post-operative radiographs of 362 patients (230 women and 132 men, mean age 70.0 years (35.2 to 90.5)) who received primary unilateral THRs of varying designs were measured after calibration. The femoral offset was calculated using the known dimensions of the implants to control for femoral rotation. Femoral offset was categorised into three groups: normal offset (within 5 mm of the height-adjusted femoral offset), low offset and high offset. We determined the associations to the absolute final score and the improvement in the mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) pain subscale scores at three, six, 12 and 24 months, adjusting for confounding variables. The amount of femoral offset was associated with the mean WOMAC pain subscale score at all points of follow-up, with the low-offset group reporting less WOMAC pain than the normal or high-offset groups (six months: 7.01 (sd 11.69) vs 12.26 (sd 15.10) vs 13.10 (sd 16.20), p = 0.006; 12 months: 6.55 (sd 11.09) vs 9.73 (sd 13.76) vs 13.46 (sd 18.39), p = 0.010; 24 months: 5.84 (sd 10.23) vs 9.60 (sd 14.43) vs 13.12 (sd 17.43), p = 0.004). When adjusting for confounding variables, including age and gender, the greatest improvement was seen in the low-offset group, with the normal-offset group demonstrating more improvement than the high-offset group.",
keywords = "Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Female, Femur Head, Hip Joint, Hip Prosthesis, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Observer Variation, Osteoarthritis, Hip, Pain Measurement, Prosthesis Design, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome",
author = "Liebs, {T R} and L Nasser and W Herzberg and Wolfgang Ruether and J Hassenpflug",
year = "2014",
month = jan,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31530",
language = "English",
volume = "96-B",
pages = "36--42",
journal = "BONE JOINT J",
issn = "2049-4394",
publisher = "British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The influence of femoral offset on health-related quality of life after total hip replacement

AU - Liebs, T R

AU - Nasser, L

AU - Herzberg, W

AU - Ruether, Wolfgang

AU - Hassenpflug, J

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Several factors have been implicated in unsatisfactory results after total hip replacement (THR). We examined whether femoral offset, as measured on digitised post-operative radiographs, was associated with pain after THR. The routine post-operative radiographs of 362 patients (230 women and 132 men, mean age 70.0 years (35.2 to 90.5)) who received primary unilateral THRs of varying designs were measured after calibration. The femoral offset was calculated using the known dimensions of the implants to control for femoral rotation. Femoral offset was categorised into three groups: normal offset (within 5 mm of the height-adjusted femoral offset), low offset and high offset. We determined the associations to the absolute final score and the improvement in the mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) pain subscale scores at three, six, 12 and 24 months, adjusting for confounding variables. The amount of femoral offset was associated with the mean WOMAC pain subscale score at all points of follow-up, with the low-offset group reporting less WOMAC pain than the normal or high-offset groups (six months: 7.01 (sd 11.69) vs 12.26 (sd 15.10) vs 13.10 (sd 16.20), p = 0.006; 12 months: 6.55 (sd 11.09) vs 9.73 (sd 13.76) vs 13.46 (sd 18.39), p = 0.010; 24 months: 5.84 (sd 10.23) vs 9.60 (sd 14.43) vs 13.12 (sd 17.43), p = 0.004). When adjusting for confounding variables, including age and gender, the greatest improvement was seen in the low-offset group, with the normal-offset group demonstrating more improvement than the high-offset group.

AB - Several factors have been implicated in unsatisfactory results after total hip replacement (THR). We examined whether femoral offset, as measured on digitised post-operative radiographs, was associated with pain after THR. The routine post-operative radiographs of 362 patients (230 women and 132 men, mean age 70.0 years (35.2 to 90.5)) who received primary unilateral THRs of varying designs were measured after calibration. The femoral offset was calculated using the known dimensions of the implants to control for femoral rotation. Femoral offset was categorised into three groups: normal offset (within 5 mm of the height-adjusted femoral offset), low offset and high offset. We determined the associations to the absolute final score and the improvement in the mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) pain subscale scores at three, six, 12 and 24 months, adjusting for confounding variables. The amount of femoral offset was associated with the mean WOMAC pain subscale score at all points of follow-up, with the low-offset group reporting less WOMAC pain than the normal or high-offset groups (six months: 7.01 (sd 11.69) vs 12.26 (sd 15.10) vs 13.10 (sd 16.20), p = 0.006; 12 months: 6.55 (sd 11.09) vs 9.73 (sd 13.76) vs 13.46 (sd 18.39), p = 0.010; 24 months: 5.84 (sd 10.23) vs 9.60 (sd 14.43) vs 13.12 (sd 17.43), p = 0.004). When adjusting for confounding variables, including age and gender, the greatest improvement was seen in the low-offset group, with the normal-offset group demonstrating more improvement than the high-offset group.

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip

KW - Female

KW - Femur Head

KW - Hip Joint

KW - Hip Prosthesis

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Observer Variation

KW - Osteoarthritis, Hip

KW - Pain Measurement

KW - Prosthesis Design

KW - Quality of Life

KW - Treatment Outcome

U2 - 10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31530

DO - 10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31530

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 24395308

VL - 96-B

SP - 36

EP - 42

JO - BONE JOINT J

JF - BONE JOINT J

SN - 2049-4394

IS - 1

ER -