Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement?

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 384, Issue , 2001, Pages 189-197

  Söderman, Peter ^a   Malchau, Henrik ^a  

^a SAHLGRENSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; FEMALE; GAIT; HIP; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION STUDY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; COHORT STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; GAIT; HIP JOINT; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0035289322     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Andersson G: Hip assessment: A comparison of nine different methods. J Bone Joint Surg 54B:621-625, 1972.
2. Bellamy N, Buchanan W, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW: Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and the knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833-1840, 1988.
3. Bellamy N, Wells G, Campbell J: Relationship between severity and clinical importance of symptoms in osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 10:138-143, 1991.
4. Bombardier C, Melfi CA, Paul J, et al: Comparison of a generic and a disease-specific measure of pain and physical function after knee replacement surgery. Med Care 33(Suppl 4):AS131-AS144, 1995.
5. Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones, et al: Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: New outcome measure for primary care. Br Med J 305:160-164, 1992.
6. Bryant MJ, Kernohan JR, Nixon JR, Mollan RAB: A statistical analysis of hip scores. J Bone Joint Surg 75B:705-709, 1993.
7. Callaghan JJ, Dysart SH, Savory CF, Hopkinson WJ: Assessing the results of hip replacement. A comparison of five different rating systems. J Bone Joint Surg 72B:1008-1009, 1990.
8. Charnley J: Numerical Grading of Clinical Results. In Charnley J (ed). Low Friction Arthroplasty of the Hip. Berlin, Springer-Verlag 23-24, 1997.
9. Chetter IC, Spark JI, Dolan P, Scott DJA, Kester RC: Quality of life analysis in patients with lower limb ischaemia: Suggestion for European standardization. Eur J Vase Endovasc Surg 13:597-604, 1997.
10. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D: Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 78B:185-190, 1996.
11. Harris WH: Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: Treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 51A:737-755, 1969.
12. Johanson NA, Charlson ME, Szatrowski TP, Ranawat CS: A self-administered hip-rating questionnaire for the assessment of outcome after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 74A:587-597, 1992.
13. Katz JN, Phillips CR, Poss R, et al: The validity and reliability of a total hip arthroplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire. J Bone Joint Surg 77A:1528-1534, 1995.
14. Katz JN, Phillips CR, Poss R, et al: Correspondence. J Bone Joint Surg 78A:1445-1448, 1996.
15. Krabbe PFM, Essink-Bot M-L, Bonsel GJ: On the equivalence of collectively and individually collected responses. Med Decis Making 16:120-132, 1996.
16. Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, et al: The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg 75A:1619-1626, 1993.
17. Martin DP, Engelberg R, Agel J, Swiontkowski F: Comparison of the musculosketal function assessment questionnaire with the Short Form-36, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Sickness Impact Profile Health-Status Measures. J Bone Joint Surg 79A:1323-1335, 1997.
18. McGrory BJ, Freiberg AA, Shinar AA, Harris WH: Correlation of measured range of motion following total hip arthroplasty and responses to a questionnaire. J Arthroplasty 11:565-571, 1996.
19. McGrory BJ, Harris WH: Can the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index be used to evaluate different hip joints in the same patients? J Arthroplasty 11:841-844, 1996.
20. Ritter MA, Albohm MJ, Keating M, Faris PM, Meding JB: Comparative outcomes of total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 10:737-741, 1995.
21. Ritter MA, Fechtman RW, Keating EM, Faris PM: The use of hip score for evaluation of the results of total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 5:187-189, 1990.
22. Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Laupacis A, et al: A double-blind study of 250 cases comparing cemented with cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 298:156-164, 1994.
23. Söderman P, Malchau H: Validity and reliability of Swedish WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index. A self-administrated disease-specific questionnaire (WOMAC) versus generic instruments (SF-36 and NHP). Acta Orthop Scand 710:39-46, 2000.
24. Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, et al: Evaluation einer Deutschen version des WOMAC (Western Ontario und McMaster Universities) arthroseindex. Z Rheumatol 55:40-49, 1996.
25. Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware JR: The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey - I. Evaluation of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and construct validity across general populations in Sweden. Soc Sci Med 41:1349-1358, 1995.
26. Sun Y, Sturmer T, Gunther KP, Brenner H: Reliability and validity of clinical outcome measurements of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee - A review of the literature. Clin Rheumatol 16:185-198, 1997.
27. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Med Care 30:473-483, 1992.