Skip to main content
Log in

The gait of patients with one resurfacing and one replacement hip: a single blinded controlled study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purposes

Post arthroplasty gait analysis has up till now been performed on subjects walking slowly on flat ground rather than challenging them at faster speeds or walking uphill. We therefore asked: (1) Is there a measurable difference in the performance of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) limbs at patients’ self-determined fastest walking speeds and steepest inclines? and (2) Is there a relationship between the observed differences between the gait of HRA and THA implanted limbs and patient walking speeds and inclines.

Methods

In an ethically approved study we recruited patients with bilateral hip arthroplasties: one HRA and one THA. Nine subjects were assessed using an instrumented treadmill at a range of speeds and inclines by a blinded observer. The ground reaction forces of subjects were recorded and an age, sex and BMI matched control group was used for comparison.

Results

Increasing walking speed correlated strongly with between leg differences in weight acceptance (r = 0.9, p = 0.000) and push-off force (r = 0.79, p = 0.002). HRA implanted limbs accepted significantly more weight at top walking speeds (1208 N ± 320 versus 1279 N ± 370, p = 0.026) and pushed off with greater force when walking uphill (818 N ± 163 versus 855 ± 166, p = 0.012). HRA limbs more closely approximated to the gait of the normal control group.

Conclusions

Arthroplasty implants do have an impact on the gait characteristics of patients. Differences in gait are more likely to be evident when assessment is made at fast speeds and walking uphill. This study suggests that HRA may enable a more normal gait.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baker RP, Pollard TC, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, Bannister GC (2011) A medium-term comparison of hybrid hip replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing in active young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(2):158–163. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25625

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Starr R, Erhart J, Bhave A (2007) Gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 22(1):100–108. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Shears E, Pynsent PB (2011) Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(1):27–33. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B1.24134

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lavigne M, Therrien M, Nantel J, Roy A, Prince F, Vendittoli PA (2010) The John Charnley Award: the functional outcome of hip resurfacing and large-head THA is the same: a randomized, double-blind study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):326–336. doi:10.1007/s11999-009-0938-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Costa ML, Achten J, Parsons NR, Edlin RP, Foguet P, Prakash U, Griffin DR (2012) Total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of patients with arthritis of the hip joint: single centre, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial. BMJ 344:e2147. doi:10.1136/bmj.e2147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Petersen MK, Andersen NT, Mogensen P, Voight M, Soballe K (2011) Gait analysis after total hip replacement with hip resurfacing implant or Mallory-head Exeter prosthesis: a randomised controlled trial. Int Orthop 35(5):667–674. doi:10.1007/s00264-010-1040-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Houdijk H, van Ooijen MW, Kraal JJ, Wiggerts HO, Polomski W, Janssen TW, Roerdink M (2012) Assessing gait adaptability in people with a unilateral amputation on an instrumented treadmill with projected visual context. Phys Ther 92(11):1452–1460. doi:10.2522/ptj.20110362

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hofstad CJ, van der Linde H, Nienhuis B, Weerdesteyn V, Duysens J, Geurts AC (2006) High failure rates when avoiding obstacles during treadmill walking in patients with a transtibial amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 87(8):1115–1122. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2006.04.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hofstad CJ, Weerdesteyn V, van der Linde H, Nienhuis B, Geurts AC, Duysens J (2009) Evidence for bilaterally delayed and decreased obstacle avoidance responses while walking with a lower limb prosthesis. Clin Neurophysiol Off J Int Fed Clin Neurophysiol 120(5):1009–1015. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wuehr M, Schniepp R, Ilmberger J, Brandt T, Jahn K (2012) Speed-dependent temporospatial gait variability and long-range correlations in cerebellar ataxia. Gait Posture 37(2):214–218. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.07.003

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schniepp R, Wuehr M, Neuhaeusser M, Kamenova M, Dimitriadis K, Klopstock T, Strupp M, Brandt T, Jahn K (2012) Locomotion speed determines gait variability in cerebellar ataxia and vestibular failure. Mov Disord Off J Mov Disord Soc 27(1):125–131. doi:10.1002/mds.23978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wiik A, Lewis A, Amis A, Cobb J (2012) Hip resurfacing arthroplasty enables faster walking and longer stride length than total hip arthroplasty. In: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, San Francisco. Paper no. 657

  13. Matsas A, Taylor N, McBurney H (2000) Knee joint kinematics from familiarised treadmill walking can be generalised to overground walking in young unimpaired subjects. Gait Posture 11(1):46–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cobb J (2010) Letter to the editor: the functional outcome of hip resurfacing and large-head THA is the same: a randomized, double-blind study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(11):3134. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1512-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

Ethical review statement

Ethical approval was sought and gained prior to commencement of the trial. All investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

This work was performed at, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, UK.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adeel Aqil.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aqil, A., Drabu, R., Bergmann, J.H. et al. The gait of patients with one resurfacing and one replacement hip: a single blinded controlled study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 37, 795–801 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-1819-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-1819-3

Keywords

Navigation