A randomised controlled trial of total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of young patients with arthritis of the hip joint

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Volumn 11, Issue , 2010, Pages

  Achten, Juul ^a   Parsons, Nick R ^a   Edlin, Richard P ^b   Griffin, Damian R ^a   Costa, Matthew L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COXITIS; HUMAN; INFORMATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; SURGEON; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; ADULT; AGE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; FEMUR HEAD; FEMUR NECK; FOLLOW UP; HIP; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; METHODOLOGY; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; RADIOGRAPHY; STATISTICS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; FEMUR HEAD; FEMUR NECK; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GREAT BRITAIN; HIP JOINT; HUMANS; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD;

EID: 77449117182     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712474     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-8     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Which primary total hip replacement? DW Murray AJ Carr CJ Bulstrode, J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995 77 4 520 527 7615593
2. Charnley low-frictional torque arthroplasty of the hip. 20-to-30 year results. BM Wroblewski PA Fleming PD Siney, J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999 81 3 427 430 10.1302/0301-620X.81B3.9521 10872359
3. The Otto Aufranc Award. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: randomized evaluation of penetration rate in cemented and uncemented sockets using radiostereometric analysis. G Digas J Karrholm J Thanner H Malchau P Herberts, Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004 429 6 16 10.1097/01.blo.0000150314.70919.e3 15577460
4. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. RB Treacy CW McBryde PB Pynsent, J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005 87 2 167 170 10.1302/0301-620X.87B2.15030 15736736
5. The optimal metal-metal arthroplasty is still a total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. JM Cuckler, J Arthroplasty 2006 21 4 Suppl 1 74 76 10.1016/j.arth.2006.02.091 16781434
6. Comparison of offset in Birmingham hip resurfacing and hybrid total hip arthroplasty. JM Loughead D Chesney JP Holland AW McCaskie, J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005 87 2 163 166 10.1302/0301-620X.87B2.15151 15736735
7. A randomised study comparing resection of acetabular bone at resurfacing and total hip replacement. PA Vendittoli M Lavigne J Girard AG Roy, J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006 88 8 997 1002 10.1302/0301-620X.88B8.17615 16877595 (Pubitemid 44241192)
8. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip. A five - to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing. TC Pollard RP Baker SJ Eastaugh-Waring GC Bannister, J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006 88 5 592 600 10.1302/0301-620X.88B5.17354 16645103
9. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup. TP Vail CA Mina JD Yergler R Pietrobon, Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006 453 123 131 10.1097/01.blo.0000238852.08497.92 17006369
10. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick A Carr D Murray, J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996 78 2 185 190 8666621 (Pubitemid 26096988)
11. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. WH Harris, J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969 51 4 737 755 5783851
12. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2007. L Curtis, Personal Social Serivces Research Unit, University of Kent 2007
13. Self-reports of health-care utilization: Diary or questionnaire? Self-reports of health-care utilization: Diary or questionnaire? M van den Brink WB van den Hout AM Stigglebout H Putter CJH van de Velde J Kievit, Int J Tech Ass Health Care 2005 21 3 298 304
14. Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? P Soderman H Malchau, Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001 384 189 197 10.1097/00003086-200103000-00022 11249165
15. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties - a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. Y Kalairajah K Azurza C Hulme S Molloy KJ Drabu, J Arthroplasty 2005 20 8 1037 1041 10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.017 16376260
16. Simple as possible? Or too simple? Possible limits to the universality of the one half standard deviation. D Beaton, Med Care 2003 41 5 593 596 10.1097/00005650-200305000-00005 12719682
17. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. J Cohen, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2 1988
18. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. DW Murray R Fitzpatrick K Rogers H Pandit DJ Beard AJ Carr J Dawson, J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007 89 8 1010 1014 10.1302/0301-620X.89B8.19424 17785736
19. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. S Holm, Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1979 6 65 70
20. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. P Dolan, Med Care 1997 35 11 1095 1108 10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002 9366889