Accurate, reproducible outcome measures are essential for the evaluation of any orthopaedic procedure, in both clinical practice and research.

Commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have drawbacks such as ‘floor’ and ‘ceiling’ effects, limitations of worldwide adaptability and an inability to distinguish pain from function. They are also unable to measure the true outcome of an intervention rather than a patient’s perception of that outcome.

Performance-based functional outcome tools may address these problems. It is important that both clinicians and researchers are aware of these measures when dealing with high-demand patients, using a new intervention or implant, or testing a new rehabilitation protocol.

This article provides an overview of some of the clinically-validated performance-based functional outcome tools used in the assessment of patients undergoing hip and knee surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1431–5.

Aims. Hip arthroscopy has gained prominence as a primary surgical intervention for symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). This study aimed to identify radiological features, and their combinations, that predict the outcome of hip arthroscopy for FAI. Methods. A prognostic cross-sectional cohort study was conducted involving patients from a single centre who underwent hip arthroscopy between January 2013 and April 2021. Radiological metrics measured on conventional radiographs and magnetic resonance arthrography were systematically assessed. The study analyzed the relationship between these metrics and complication rates, revision rates, and patient-reported outcomes. Results. Out of 810 identified hip arthroscopies, 359 hips were included in the study. Radiological risk factors associated with unsatisfactory outcomes after cam resection included a dysplastic posterior wall, Tönnis grade 2 or higher, and over-correction of the α angle. The presence of acetabular retroversion and dysplasia were also significant predictors for worse surgical outcomes. Notably, over-correction of both cam and pincer deformities resulted in poorer outcomes than under-correction. Conclusion. We recommend caution in performing hip arthroscopy in patients who have three positive acetabular retroversion signs. Acetabular dysplasia with a lateral centre-edge angle of less than 20° should not be treated with isolated hip arthroscopy. Acetabular rim-trimming should be avoided in patients with borderline dysplasia, and care should be taken to avoid over-correction of a cam deformity and/or pincer deformity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):775–782

Aims. This paper aims to review the evidence for patient-related factors associated with less favourable outcomes following hip arthroscopy. Methods. Literature reporting on preoperative patient-related risk factors and outcomes following hip arthroscopy were systematically identified from a computer-assisted literature search of Pubmed (Medline), Embase, and Cochrane Library using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and a scoping review. Results. Assessment of these texts yielded 101 final articles involving 90,315 hips for qualitative analysis. The most frequently reported risk factor related to a less favourable outcome after hip arthroscopy was older age and preoperative osteoarthritis of the hip. This was followed by female sex and patients who have low preoperative clinical scores, severe hip dysplasia, altered hip morphology (excess acetabular retroversion or excess femoral anteversion or retroversion), or a large cam deformity. Patients receiving workers’ compensation or with rheumatoid arthritis were also more likely to have a less favourable outcome after hip arthroscopy. There is evidence that obesity, smoking, drinking alcohol, and a history of mental illness may be associated with marginally less favourable outcomes after hip arthroscopy. Athletes (except for ice hockey players) enjoy a more rapid recovery after hip arthroscopy than non-athletes. Finally, patients who have a favourable response to local anaesthetic are more likely to have a favourable outcome after hip arthroscopy. Conclusion. Certain patient-related risk factors are associated with less favourable outcomes following hip arthroscopy. Understanding these risk factors will allow the appropriate surgical indications for hip arthroscopy to be further refined and help patients to comprehend their individual risk profile. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):822–831

Aims

To determine if patient ethnicity among patients with a hip fracture influences the type of fracture, surgical care, and outcome.

Aims

This study aims to describe the pre- and postoperative self-reported health and quality of life from a national cohort of patients undergoing elective total conventional hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in Australia. For context, these data will be compared with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data from other international nation-wide registries.

Aims

To establish if COVID-19 has worsened outcomes in patients with AO 31 A or B type hip fractures.

We report gender differences in the epidemiology and outcome after hip fracture from the Scottish Hip Fracture Audit, with data on admission and at 120 days follow-up from 22 orthopaedic units across the country between 1998 and 2005. Outcome measures included early mortality, length of hospital stay, 120-day residence and mobility. A multivariate logistic regression model compared outcomes between genders. The study comprised 25 649 patients of whom 5674 (22%) were men and 19 975 (78%) were women. The men were in poorer pre-operative health, despite being younger at presentation (mean 77 years (60 to 101) vs 81 years (50 to 106)). Pre-fracture residence and mobility were similar between genders. Multivariate analysis indicated that the men were less likely to return to their home or mobilise independently at the 120-day follow-up. Mortality at 30 and 120 days was higher for men, even after differences in case-mix variables between genders were considered

There is a known association between femoroacetabular impingement and osteoarthritis of the hip. What is not known is whether arthroscopic excision of an impingement lesion can significantly improve a patient’s symptoms.

This study compares the results of hip arthroscopy for cam-type femoracetabular impingement in two groups of patients at one year. The study group comprised 24 patients (24 hips) with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement who underwent arthroscopic debridement with excision of their impingement lesion (osteoplasty). The control group comprised 47 patients (47 hips) who had arthroscopic debridement without excision of the impingement lesion. In both groups, the presence of femoroacetabular impingement was confirmed on pre-operative plain radiographs. The modified Harris hip score was used for evaluation pre-operatively and at one-year. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis.

A tendency towards a higher median post-operative modified Harris hip score was observed in the study group compared with the control group (83 vs 77, p = 0.11). There was a significantly higher proportion of patients in the osteoplasty group with excellent/good results compared with the controls (83% vs 60%, p = 0.043). Additional symptomatic improvement may be obtained after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement by the inclusion of femoral osteoplasty.

We compared the length of hospitalisation, rate of infection, dislocation of the hip and revision, and mortality following primary hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (n = 1064) and a matched control group (n = 3192). The data were collected from nationwide Finnish health registers. Patients with Alzheimer’s disease had a longer peri-operative hospitalisation (median 13 days vs eight days, p < 0.001) and an increased risk for hip revision with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.76 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 3.00). Dislocation was the leading indication for revision. There was no difference in the rates of infection, dislocation of the hip, knee revision and short-term mortality. In long-term follow-up, patients with Alzheimer’s disease had a higher mortality (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.70), and only one third survived ten years post-operatively. Increased age and comorbidity were associated with longer peri-operative hospitalisation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:654–61.

We report a prospective study of 232 consecutive patients with hip fractures. All were over 64 years of age and living independently before admission to a geriatric orthopaedic ward. We assessed the value, at admission, of predicting factors for independent living at one year after injury.

The most important factors were: (1) preinjury function in activities of daily living (grade A or B on the Katz et al (1963) scale); (2) absence of other medical conditions which would impair rehabilitation; and (3) cognitive function better than 7 on the Pfeiffer (1975) mental questionnaire. The odds ratios (95% CI) for these three predictors were 3.5 (1.3 to 9.1), 2.9 (1.3 to 6.1) and 2.4 (1.9 to 4.9), respectively. When all predictors were positive at admission, 92% were living independently at one year; with one, two or three negative predictors, the percentages living independently were 76, 61 and 27, respectively.

The median values of the total number of days in hospital, irrespective of diagnosis, during the first year were 12, 24, 29 and 149 days for the four groups. The mortality at one year was predictable on admission only by the number of medical conditions: with no other diagnosis than the fracture the mortality was 0%; with one or two additional conditions the mortality was 14%; and with three or more additional diagnoses it was 24%.

These simple and robust predictors can be used to optimise resources for rehabilitation.

The June 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Machine learning to identify surgical candidates for hip and knee arthroplasty: a viable option?; Poor outcome after debridement and implant retention; Can you cement polyethylene liners into well-fixed acetabular shells in hip revision?; Revision stem in primary arthroplasties: the Exeter 44/0 125 mm stem; Depression and anxiety: could they be linked to infection?; Does where you live affect your outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasties?; Racial disparities in outcomes after total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty are substantially mediated by socioeconomic disadvantage both in black and white patients

The December 2022 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Fix and replace: simultaneous fracture fixation and hip arthroplasty for acetabular fractures in older patients; Is the revision rate for femoral neck fracture lower for total hip arthroplasty than for hemiarthroplasty?; Femoral periprosthetic fractures: data from the COMPOSE cohort study; Dual-mobility cups and fracture of the femur; What’s the deal with outcomes for hip and knee arthroplasty outcomes internationally?; Osteochondral lesions of the femoral head: is costal cartilage the answer?

Aims. The influence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) on the outcome after hip and knee arthroplasty is debated. We aimed to investigate the change in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores after hip and knee arthroplasty, comparing patients with and without MetS. Methods. From 1 May 2017 to 30 November 2019, a prospective cohort of 2,586 patients undergoing elective unilateral hip and knee arthroplasty was established in Denmark. Data from national registries and a local database were used to determine the presence of MetS. Patients’ scores on Oxford Hip Score (OHS) or Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Scale, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at baseline, three, 12, and 24 months after surgery were collected. Primary outcome was the difference between groups from baseline to 12 months in OHS and OKS. Secondary outcomes were scores of OHS and OKS at three and 24 months and EQ-5D-5L, UCLA Activity Scale, and FJS at three, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Generalized linear mixed model was applied, adjusting for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and smoking to present marginal mean and associated 95% CIs. Results. A total of 62.3% (1,611/2,586) of the cohort met the criteria for MetS. Both groups showed similar increase in mean OHS (MetS group 22.5 (95% CI 21.8 to 23.1), non-MetS group 22.1 (21.3 to 22.8); p = 0.477) and mean OKS (MetS group 18.0 (17.4 to 18.6), non-MetS group 17.8 (17.0 to 18.7); p = 0.722) at 12 months' follow-up. Between groups, similar improvements were seen for OHS and OKS at three and 24 months postoperatively and for the mean EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol-visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), UCLA Activity Scale, and FJS at every timepoint. Conclusion. Patients meeting the criteria for MetS obtain the same improvement in PROM scores as individuals without MetS up to 24 months after hip and knee arthroplasty. This is important for the clinician to take into account when assessing and advising patients with MetS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1074–1083

Aims. Delirium is associated with adverse outcomes following hip fracture, but the prevalence and significance of delirium for the prognosis and ongoing rehabilitation needs of patients admitted from home is less well studied. Here, we analyzed relationships between delirium in patients admitted from home with 1) mortality; 2) total length of hospital stay; 3) need for post-acute inpatient rehabilitation; and 4) hospital readmission within 180 days. Methods. This observational study used routine clinical data in a consecutive sample of hip fracture patients aged ≥ 50 years admitted to a single large trauma centre during the COVID-19 pandemic between 1 March 2020 and 30 November 2021. Delirium was prospectively assessed as part of routine care by the 4 A’s Test (4AT), with most assessments performed in the emergency department. Associations were determined using logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile, COVID-19 infection within 30 days, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade. Results. A total of 1,821 patients were admitted, with 1,383 (mean age 79.5 years; 72.1% female) directly from home. Overall, 87 patients (4.8%) were excluded due to missing 4AT scores. Delirium prevalence in the whole cohort was 26.5% (460/1,734): 14.1% (189/1,340) in the subgroup of patients admitted from home, and 68.8% (271/394) in the remaining patients (comprising care home residents and inpatients when fracture occurred). In patients admitted from home, delirium was associated with a 20-day longer total length of stay (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, delirium was associated with higher mortality at 180 days (odds ratio (OR) 1.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.54); p = 0.013), requirement for post-acute inpatient rehabilitation (OR 2.80 (95% CI 1.97 to 3.96); p < 0.001), and readmission to hospital within 180 days (OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.02 to 3.15); p = 0.041). Conclusion. Delirium affects one in seven patients with a hip fracture admitted directly from home, and is associated with adverse outcomes in these patients. Delirium assessment and effective management should be a mandatory part of standard hip fracture care. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(6):447–456

Aims. We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture. Methods. Of 1,577 consecutive patients aged > 65 years with a fragility hip fracture admitted to one institution, for whom there were complete data, 1,255 (72%) were studied. Clinicians assigned CFS scores on admission. Audit personnel routinely prospectively completed the Standardised Audit of Hip Fracture in Europe form, including the following outcomes: 30-day survival; in-hospital complications; length of acute hospital stay; and new institutionalization. The relationship between the CFS scores and outcomes was examined graphically and the visual interpretations were tested statistically. The predictive values of the CFS and Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) to predict 30-day mortality were compared using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Results. Significant non-linear associations between CFS and outcomes were observed. Risk of death within 30 days rose linearly for CFS 1 to 5, but plateaued for CFS > 5. The incidence of complications and length of stay rose linearly for CFS 1 to 4, but plateaued for CFS > 4. In contrast, the risk of new institutionalization rose linearly for CFS 1 to 8. The AUCs for 30-day mortality for the CFS and NHFS were very similar: CFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69) and NHFS AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.69). Conclusion. Use of the CFS may provide useful information on outcomes for fitter patients presenting with hip fracture, but completion of the CFS by the admitting orthopaedic team does not appear successful in distinguishing between higher CFS categories, which define patients with frailty. This makes a strong case for the role of the orthogeriatrician in the early assessment of these patients. Further work is needed to understand why patients assessed as being of mild, moderate, and severe frailty do not result in different outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):980–986

Aims. Hip fracture is a common condition of the older, frailer person. This population is also at risk from SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is important to understand the impact of coexistent hip fracture and SARS-CoV-2 for informed decision-making at patient and service levels. Methods. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies of older (> 60 years) people with fragility hip fractures and outcomes with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was early (30-day or in-hospital) mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and key clinical characteristics known to be associated with outcomes after hip fracture. Results. A total of 14 cohort and five case series studies were included (692 SARS-CoV-2 positive, 2,585 SARS-CoV-2 negative). SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an overall risk ratio (RR) for early mortality of 4.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.42 to 5.82). Early mortality was 34% (95% CI 30% to 38%) and 9% (95% CI 8% to 10%) in the infected and noninfected groups respectively. Length of stay was increased in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (mean difference (MD) 5.2 days (3.2 to 7.2)). Age (MD 1.6 years (0.3 to 2.9)); female sex (RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.05)); admission from home (RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.26 to 1.00)); presence of dementia (RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.43)); and intracapsular fracture (RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.11)) were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were statistically, but not clinically, significantly greater Nottingham Hip Fracture Scores in infected compared with non-infected patients (MD 0.7 (0.4 to 0.9)). Conclusion. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with worse outcomes after hip fracture. This is not explained by differences in patient characteristics. These data can be used to support informed decision-making and may help track the impact of widespread adoption of system-level and therapeutic changes in management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):314–322

Aims. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the association between exchange of modular parts in debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedure and outcomes for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods. We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception until May 2021. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-regression was used to estimate, on a study level, the success rate of DAIR related to component exchange. Risk of bias was appraised using the (AQUILA) checklist. Results. We included 65 studies comprising 6,630 patients. The pooled overall success after DAIR for PJI was 67% (95% confidence interval (CI) 63% to 70%). This was 70% (95% CI 65% to 75%) for DAIR for hip PJI and 63% (95% CI 58% to 69%) for knee PJI. In studies before 2004 (n = 27), our meta-regression analysis showed a 3.5% increase in success rates for each 10% increase in component exchange in DAIR for hip PJI and a 3.1% increase for each 10% increase in component exchange for knee PJI. When restricted to studies after 2004 (n = 37), this association changed: for DAIR for hip PJI a decrease in successful outcome by 0.5% for each 10% increase in component exchange and for DAIR for knee PJI this was a 0.01% increase in successful outcome for each 10% increase in component exchange. Conclusion. This systematic review and meta-regression found no benefit of modular component exchange on reduction of PJI failure. This limited effect should be weighed against the risks for the patient and cost on a case-by-case basis. The association between exchange of modular components and outcome changed before and after 2004. This suggests the effect seen after 2004 may reflect a more rigorous, evidence-based, approach to the infected implant compared to the years before. Level of Evidence: Level III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):806–812

The August 2023 Trauma Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: A comparison of functional cast and volar-flexion ulnar deviation for dorsally displaced distal radius fractures; Give your stable ankle fractures some AIR!; Early stabilization of rib fractures – an effective thing to do?; Locked plating versus nailing for proximal tibia fractures: A multicentre randomized controlled trial; Time to flap coverage in open tibia fractures; Does tranexamic acid affect the incidence of heterotropic ossification around the elbow?; High BMI – good or bad in surgical fixation of hip fractures?

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of hospital-level service characteristics on hip fracture outcomes and quality of care processes measures. Methods. This was a retrospective analysis of publicly available audit data obtained from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) 2018 benchmark summary and Facilities Survey. Data extraction was performed using a dedicated proforma to identify relevant hospital-level care process and outcome variables for inclusion. The primary outcome measure was adjusted 30-day mortality rate. A random forest-based multivariate imputation by chained equation (MICE) algorithm was used for missing value imputation. Univariable analysis for each hospital level factor was performed using a combination of Tobit regression, Siegal non-parametric linear regression, and Mann-Whitney U test analyses, dependent on the data type. In all analyses, a p-value < 0.05 denoted statistical significance. Results. Analyses included 176 hospitals, with a median of 366 hip fracture cases per year (interquartile range (IQR) 280 to 457). Aggregated data from 66,578 patients were included. The only identified hospital-level variable associated with the primary outcome of 30-day mortality was hip fracture trial involvement (no trial involvement: median 6.3%; trial involvement: median 5.7%; p = 0.039). Significant key associations were also identified between prompt surgery and presence of dedicated hip fracture sessions; reduced acute length of stay and both a higher number of hip fracture cases per year and more dedicated hip fracture operating lists; Best Practice Tariff attainment and greater number of hip fracture cases per year, more dedicated hip fracture operating lists, presence of a dedicated hip fracture ward, and hip fracture trial involvement. Conclusion. Exploratory analyses have identified that improved outcomes in hip fracture may be associated with hospital-level service characteristics, such as hip fracture research trial involvement, larger hip fracture volumes, and the use of theatre lists dedicated to hip fracture surgery. Further research using patient level data is warranted to corroborate these findings. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(10):1627–1632

The October 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome at ten years – how do athletes do?; Venous thromboembolism in patients following total joint replacement: are transfusions to blame?; What changes in pelvic sagittal tilt occur 20 years after total hip arthroplasty?; Can stratified care in hip arthroscopy predict successful and unsuccessful outcomes?; Hip replacement into your nineties; Can large language models help with follow-up?; The most taxing of revisions – proximal femoral replacement for periprosthetic joint infection – what’s the benefit of dual mobility?