Patient perceived outcomes after primary hip arthroplasty: does gender matter?

Carlos J Lavernia, Jose C Alcerro, Juan S Contreras, Mark D Rossi
Author Information
  1. Carlos J Lavernia: Orthopaedic Institute at Mercy Hospital, 3659 South Miami Avenue, Suite 4008, Miami, FL 33133, USA. CLavernia@mercymiami.org

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) provides high functional scores and long-term survivorship. However, differences in function and disability between men and women before and after arthroplasty are not well understood.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined if there was a gender difference in patient-perceived functional measures and range of motion in primary THA.
METHODS: We retrospectively studied 532 patients (658 hips) undergoing primary THA. A total of 59% were women and 41% were men. Patients were assessed preoperatively and at minimum 2 years using Quality of Well-being, SF-36, WOMAC, and Harris hip score. We determined if differences existed between genders before and at followup for all dependent measures. Independent t-tests were also used to determine differences between genders concerning the change (Δ) scores and hip range of motion. The time course of perceived functional recovery was also documented.
RESULTS: Males were on average 5 years (58) younger than females (63). Before surgery, females scored worse than males on the Harris hip score, WOMAC function, WOMAC pain, and WOMAC total scores. All scores improved at followup in both groups. Regardless of time, females had lower scores than males. However, females had greater improvement over males for WOMAC function (39 versus 35), WOMAC pain (11 versus 10), and WOMAC total (53 versus 48).
CONCLUSIONS: Substantial gender functional differences exist before treatment. However, women reported greater improvement as a result of the intervention when compared with men.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

References

  1. J Arthroplasty. 1997 Sep;12(6):639-45 [PMID: 9306214]
  2. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002 Nov;41(11):1261-7 [PMID: 12421998]
  3. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):135-40 [PMID: 18780137]
  4. J Arthroplasty. 2004 Feb;19(2):180-9 [PMID: 14973861]
  5. J Rheumatol. 1988 Dec;15(12):1833-40 [PMID: 3068365]
  6. J Arthroplasty. 2002 Jan;17(1):70-7 [PMID: 11805928]
  7. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Jul;(316):31-44 [PMID: 7634721]
  8. J Arthroplasty. 2005 Sep;20(6):730-7 [PMID: 16139709]
  9. Psychosom Med. 2000 May-Jun;62(3):354-64 [PMID: 10845349]
  10. Am J Public Health. 1996 Jan;86(1):70-2 [PMID: 8561246]
  11. Arthritis Rheum. 1994 May;37(5):687-94 [PMID: 8185695]
  12. J Arthroplasty. 2009 Oct;24(7):1033-43 [PMID: 18963759]
  13. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jun;86(6):1172-8 [PMID: 15173289]
  14. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83 [PMID: 3558716]
  15. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jul;87(7):1631-47 [PMID: 15995134]
  16. Orthop Clin North Am. 2006 Oct;37(4):559-68 [PMID: 17141013]
  17. J Arthroplasty. 1999 Jan;14(1):102-7 [PMID: 9926961]
  18. J Arthroplasty. 2006 Jun;21(4):559-66 [PMID: 16781410]
  19. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):7-27 [PMID: 18941852]
  20. Orthopedics. 2005 Feb;28(2 Suppl):s201-5 [PMID: 15747607]
  21. Arthritis Care Res. 1996 Dec;9(6):473-82 [PMID: 9136291]
  22. Acta Orthop Belg. 2008 Feb;74(1):83-9 [PMID: 18411606]
  23. Qual Life Res. 1998 Feb;7(2):121-6 [PMID: 9523493]
  24. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969 Jun;51(4):737-55 [PMID: 5783851]

MeSH Term

Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
Disability Evaluation
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Hip
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
Patient Satisfaction
Postoperative Complications
Quality of Life
Recovery of Function
Retrospective Studies
Self-Assessment
Sex Factors

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0WOMAChipscoresfunctionaldifferencesfemalesTHAHoweverfunctionmenwomengenderprimarytotalmalesversusarthroplastydeterminedmeasuresrangemotionyearsHarrisscoregendersfollowupalsotimeperceivedpaingreaterimprovementBACKGROUND:Totalprovideshighlong-termsurvivorshipdisabilitywellunderstoodQUESTIONS/PURPOSES:differencepatient-perceivedMETHODS:retrospectivelystudied532patients658hipsundergoing59%41%Patientsassessedpreoperativelyminimum2usingQualityWell-beingSF-36existeddependentIndependentt-testsuseddetermineconcerningchangeΔcourserecoverydocumentedRESULTS:Malesaverage558younger63surgeryscoredworseimprovedgroupsRegardlesslower393511105348CONCLUSIONS:SubstantialexisttreatmentreportedresultinterventioncomparedLEVELOFEVIDENCE:LevelIIIprognosticstudySeeGuidelinesAuthorscompletedescriptionlevelsevidencePatientoutcomesarthroplasty:matter?

Similar Articles

Cited By