Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 495–501 | Cite as

Primary total hip arthroplasty: health related quality of life outcomes

  • Ivan Bagarić
  • Helena Šarac
  • Josip Anđelo BorovacEmail author
  • Tonko Vlak
  • Josip Bekavac
  • Andrija Hebrang
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

The health related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) present a pertinent and clinically important problem in modern orthopaedics. Our goal was to report and compare the health-related outcomes after THA in respect to type of fixation in patients with hip osteoarthritis (H-OA) one year after operation.

Methods

A total of 145 patients with H-OA who received THA were evaluated. Uncemented and cemented subjects were evaluated using generic measures, i.e. the EQ-5D questionnaire, and the disease-specific measures designed by the authors, i.e. the Total Hip Arthroplasty Questionnaire (THAQ). Obtained data was statistically processed at the level of pain, functionality and general health perception. Patient-reported outcomes were measured differences between pre-operative measures and those at one-year follow-up visit.

Results

Significant improvement in health outcomes was reached in both groups regardless of the type of fixation (p < 0.001). Uncemented fixation exhibited better results for EQ-5DINDEX, pain (p = 0.004) and self-care on EQ-5D (p = 0.043), as well as increased magnitude of change for functionality on THAQ (p = 0.002). However, additional analysis of the subset did not reveal a significant difference between cemented vs. uncemented groups with regard to function on THAQ, but the significant difference on self-care and pain dimensions of EQ-5D remained.

Conclusions

Uncemented endoprosthesis generally achieved better short-term outcomes in some dimensions. However, painless mobility has been restored in most of the patients, regardless of the fixation type. Both methods reached good clinical outcomes in their respective domains; therefore, we would emphasise prevention of osteoarthritis and the quality of care as the more important predictors of good clinical outcomes.

Keywords

HRQoL THA Quality Fixation Hip Osteoarthritis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery of the University Hospital Split, especially to nurse Ines Puljiz and medical technician Mladen Levačić, for providing facilities for performing the clinical evaluation of THA patients. We are frankly thankful to Žarko Bajić for technical help. Special thanks to Reuben Eldar—without him, this research would have not been possible.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Prior to the study, the approval of University Hospital Center Split ethics committee was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in the study. Ethical approval filed under number # 2181-147-03-01-11

References

  1. 1.
    Quintana JM, Arostegui I, Escobar A, Azkarate J, Goenaga JI, Lafuente I (2008) Prevalence of knee and hip osteoarthritis and the appropriateness of joint replacement in an older population. Arch Intern Med 168(14):1576–1584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hailer NP, Garellick G, Karrholm J (2010) Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 81(1):34–41PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY (2004) Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A(5):963–974PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mota RE, Tarricone R, Ciani O, Bridges JF, Drummond M (2012) Determinants of demand for total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Serv Res 12:225PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lavernia CJ, Alcerro JC (2011) Quality of life and cost-effectiveness 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26(5):705–709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Senthi S, Munro JT, Pitto RP (2011) Infection in total hip replacement: meta-analysis. Int Orthop 35(2):253–260PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Singh JA, Kundukulam J, Riddle DL, Strand V, Tugwell P (2011) Early postoperative mortality following joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Rheumatol 38(7):1507–1513PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Quintana JM, Escobar A, Arostegui I, Bilbao A, Azkarate J, Goenaga JI et al (2006) Health-related quality of life and appropriateness of knee or hip joint replacement. Arch Intern Med 166(2):220–226PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A et al (2012) Knee replacement. Lancet 379(9823):1331–1340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Culliford DJ, Maskell J, Kiran A, Judge A, Javaid MK, Cooper C et al (2012) The lifetime risk of total hip and knee arthroplasty: results from the UK general practice research database. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 20(6):519–524PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jones CA, Pohar S (2012) Health-related quality of life after total joint arthroplasty: a scoping review. Clin Geriatr Med 28(3):395–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Santaguida PL, Hawker GA, Hudak PL, Glazier R, Mahomed NN, Kreder HJ et al (2008) Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Can J Surg 51(6):428–436PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singh JA (2011) Smoking and outcomes after knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Rheumatol 38(9):1824–1834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clement ND, Muzammil A, Macdonald D, Howie CR, Biant LC (2011) Socioeconomic status affects the early outcome of total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(4):464–469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ravi B, Escott B, Shah PS, Jenkinson R, Chahal J, Bogoch E et al (2012) A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing complications following total joint arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis versus for osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 64(12):3839–3849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meyer E, Weitzel-Kage D, Sohr D, Gastmeier P (2011) Impact of department volume on surgical site infections following arthroscopy, knee replacement or hip replacement. BMJ Qual Saf 20(12):1069–1074PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shervin N, Rubash HE, Katz JN (2007) Orthopaedic procedure volume and patient outcomes: a systematic literature review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 457:35–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khan F, Ng L, Gonzalez S, Hale T, Turner-Stokes L (2008) Multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes following joint replacement at the hip and knee in chronic arthropathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD004957Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jolles BM, Bogoch ER (2006) Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD003828Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morshed S, Bozic KJ, Ries MD, Malchau H, Colford JM (2007) Comparison of cemented and uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: a meta-analysis. Acta Orthop 78(3):315–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pakvis D, van Hellemondt G, de Visser E, Jacobs W, Spruit M (2011) Is there evidence for a superior method of socket fixation in hip arthroplasty? A systematic review. Int Orthop 35(8):1109–1118PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bream E, Black N (2009) What is the relationship between patients' and clinicians' reports of the outcomes of elective surgery? J Health Serv Res Policy 14(3):174–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Bowman DH (2008) Findings of extensive variation in the types of outcome measures used in hip and knee replacement clinical trials: a systematic review. Arthritis Rheum 59(6):876–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mariconda M, Galasso O, Costa GG, Recano P, Cerbasi S (2011) Quality of life and functionality after total hip arthroplasty: a long-term follow-up study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:222PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zwartele RE, Witjes S, Doets HC, Stijnen T, Poll RG (2012) Cementless total hip arthroplasty in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132(4):535–546PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    McMinn DJ, Snell KI, Daniel J, Treacy RB, Pynsent PB, Riley RD (2012) Mortality and implant revision rates of hip arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis: registry based cohort study. BMJ 344:e3319PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brooks R (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37(1):53–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shi HY, Chiu HC, Chang JK, Wang JW, Culbertson R, Khan MM (2008) Evaluation and prediction of health-related quality of life replacement among Chinese in Taiwan. Int Orthop 32(1):27–32PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shi HY, Khan M, Culbertson R, Chang JK, Wang JW, Chiu HC (2009) Health-related quality of life after total hip replacement: a Taiwan study. Int Orthop 33(5):1217–1222PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Montin L, Leino-Kilpi H, Suominen T, Lepisto J (2008) A systematic review of empirical studies between 1966 and 2005 of patient outcomes of total hip arthroplasty and related factors. J Clin Nurs 17(1):40–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Beswick AD, Wylde V, Gooberman-Hill R, Blom A, Dieppe P (2012) What proportion of patients report long-term pain after total hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis? A systematic review of prospective studies in unselected patients. BMJ Open 2(1):e000435PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Fleming PA (2009) Charnley low-frictional torque arthroplasty: follow-up for 30 to 40 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91(4):447–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Della Valle CJ, Mesko NW, Quigley L, Rosenberg AG, Jacobs JJ, Galante JO (2009) Primary total hip arthroplasty with a porous-coated acetabular component. A concise follow-up, at a minimum of twenty years, of previous reports. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(5):1130–1135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Alviar MJ, Olver J, Brand C, Tropea J, Hale T, Pirpiris M et al (2011) Do patient-reported outcome measures in hip and knee arthroplasty rehabilitation have robust measurement attributes? A systematic review. J Rehabil Med 43(7):572–583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivan Bagarić
    • 1
  • Helena Šarac
    • 2
  • Josip Anđelo Borovac
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tonko Vlak
    • 3
  • Josip Bekavac
    • 4
  • Andrija Hebrang
    • 5
  1. 1.University of Split School of Medicine (MEFST)SplitCroatia
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyUniversity Hospital ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  3. 3.Department of Rehabilitation Medicine and Rheumatology, University Hospital SplitUniversity of Split School of MedicineSplitCroatia
  4. 4.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity Hospital Split SplitCroatia
  5. 5.University of Zagreb School of MedicineZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations