• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

原发性与翻修全髋关节置换术后患者报告结局测量的差异:低基线活动患者的现实患者期望。

Differences in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Between Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Realistic Patient Expectations for Patients With Low Baseline Activity.

出版信息

Orthopedics. 2022 Jul-Aug;45(4):251-255. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20220225-04. Epub 2022 Mar 4.

DOI:10.3928/01477447-20220225-04
PMID:35245136
Abstract

Primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) are not often compared in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, surgeons and patients need to better understand the differences in PROMs between primary and revision surgery to set realistic patient expectations and recovery milestones. A matched cohort study of pTHA to rTHA was performed with our arthroplasty database of a single surgeon's experience from 2012 to 2018. There was a significant difference in both pre-operative assessment and change from preoperative to postoperative assessment of the PROMs. Patients undergoing pTHA had higher visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (67.9 vs 57.9, =.004). Those undergoing rTHA had higher Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) (57.1 vs 50.1, =.008) and Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12) (33.5 vs 33.1, =.01) scores. However, a significant change was noted in the difference from preoperative to postoperative scores between the pTHA and rTHA groups: Harris Hip Score (HHS) total score (pTHA 30.7 vs rTHA 4.4, <.001), WOMAC score (pTHA 29.3 vs rTHA 12.2, <.001), and VAS pain score (pTHA -48.3 vs rTHA -26.5, <.001) as well as groin pain (pTHA 1.4% vs rTHA 7.1%, =.02). Further, PROMs after rTHA were inferior to those after pTHA with several outcome instruments, including HHS, WOMAC score, and VAS pain score. In addition, groin pain was significantly greater in the rTHA cohort compared with the pTHA cohort at the latest follow-up. This study allows surgeons and patients to better understand the differences in PROMs to set realistic patient expectations and recovery milestones. [. 2022;45(4):251-255.].

摘要

初次全髋关节置换术(pTHA)和翻修全髋关节置换术(rTHA)在患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)方面通常不进行比较。然而,为了设定现实的患者预期和康复里程碑,外科医生和患者需要更好地理解初次手术和翻修手术之间 PROMs 的差异。对 2012 年至 2018 年期间一位外科医生的关节置换数据库进行了 pTHA 与 rTHA 的配对队列研究。在 PROMs 的术前评估和从术前到术后评估的变化方面,均存在显著差异。接受 pTHA 的患者视觉模拟量表(VAS)疼痛评分较高(67.9 比 57.9,=.004)。接受 rTHA 的患者 Western Ontario 和 McMaster 大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)评分较高(57.1 比 50.1,=.008)和退伍军人 RAND 12 项健康调查(VR-12)评分较高(33.5 比 33.1,=.01)。然而,在 pTHA 和 rTHA 组之间,从术前到术后评分的差异显著:Harris 髋关节评分(HHS)总分(pTHA 30.7 比 rTHA 4.4,<.001)、WOMAC 评分(pTHA 29.3 比 rTHA 12.2,<.001)和 VAS 疼痛评分(pTHA -48.3 比 rTHA -26.5,<.001)以及腹股沟疼痛(pTHA 1.4%比 rTHA 7.1%,=.02)。此外,rTHA 后的 PROMs 在几个结果工具方面均劣于 pTHA,包括 HHS、WOMAC 评分和 VAS 疼痛评分。此外,rTHA 队列在末次随访时的腹股沟疼痛明显大于 pTHA 队列。本研究使外科医生和患者能够更好地理解 PROMs 的差异,从而设定现实的患者预期和康复里程碑。[2022;45(4):251-255.]。

相似文献

1
Differences in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Between Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Realistic Patient Expectations for Patients With Low Baseline Activity.原发性与翻修全髋关节置换术后患者报告结局测量的差异:低基线活动患者的现实患者期望。
Orthopedics. 2022 Jul-Aug;45(4):251-255. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20220225-04. Epub 2022 Mar 4.
2
Do patient-reported outcome measures improve after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty?无菌性翻修全髋关节置换术后患者报告的结局指标会改善吗?
Hip Int. 2023 Mar;33(2):267-279. doi: 10.1177/11207000211036320. Epub 2021 Sep 23.
3
Improved Functional Outcomes with Robotic Compared with Manual Total Hip Arthroplasty.与人工全髋关节置换术相比,机器人辅助全髋关节置换术的功能预后更佳。
Surg Technol Int. 2016 Oct 26;29:303-308.
4
Does the Primary Surgical Approach Matter When Choosing the Approach for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?初次手术入路是否会影响翻修全髋关节置换术的入路选择?
J Arthroplasty. 2024 Jan;39(1):211-217. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.06.040. Epub 2023 Jul 1.
5
Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Demonstrate Less Improvement and Significantly Higher Rates of Worsening Compared to Primaries.与初次全髋关节置换术相比,翻修全髋关节置换术后患者报告的结局显示改善较少且恶化率显著更高。
J Arthroplasty. 2023 Nov;38(11):2410-2414. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.05.053. Epub 2023 Jun 2.
6
Patient-reported outcome measures, complication rates, and re-revision rates are not associated with the indication for revision total hip arthroplasty : a prospective evaluation of 647 consecutive patients.患者报告的结果测量指标、并发症发生率和再次翻修率与全髋关节翻修的适应证无关:对 647 例连续患者的前瞻性评估。
Bone Joint J. 2022 Jul;104-B(7):859-866. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.104B7.BJJ-2021-1739.R1.
7
Conversion of hip resurfacing to total hip arthroplasty: is the outcome closer to primary or revision total hip arthroplasty?髋关节表面置换术转换为全髋关节置换术:其结果更接近初次全髋关节置换术还是翻修全髋关节置换术?
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2024 Dec;110(8):103950. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2024.103950. Epub 2024 Jul 17.
8
[Effect of Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty on Gait Kinematics].[初次及翻修全髋关节置换术对步态运动学的影响]
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020;87(4):243-250.
9
Revision total hip arthroplasty is associated with poorer clinically meaningful improvements and patient satisfaction compared to primary total hip arthroplasty.与初次全髋关节置换术相比,翻修全髋关节置换术在临床上有意义的改善和患者满意度方面较差。
J Orthop. 2021 Nov 27;28:96-100. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.11.008. eCollection 2021 Nov-Dec.
10
Patient Reported Outcomes After Conversion vs. Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Matched Analysis.转换与原发性全髋关节置换术后患者报告结局的比较:倾向匹配分析。
Iowa Orthop J. 2022;42(2):47-52.

引用本文的文献

1
Examining the "revisability" benefit of hip resurfacing arthroplasty.探讨髋关节表面置换术的“可翻修性”优势。
World J Orthop. 2024 Jun 18;15(6):554-559. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v15.i6.554.
2
Propensity score-matched comparison of physical activity and quality of life between revision total hip arthroplasty and primary total hip arthroplasty.翻修全髋关节置换术与初次全髋关节置换术之间身体活动及生活质量的倾向评分匹配比较
J Orthop. 2023 Apr 18;40:23-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.04.012. eCollection 2023 Jun.