This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lawlor, M. Articles by Beverland, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lawlor, M. Articles by Beverland, D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparison of early postoperative functional levels following total hip replacement using minimally invasive versus standard incisions. A prospective randomized blinded trial

Patricia Humphreys

Esther Morrow

Physiotherapy Department, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Luke Ogonda

Orthopaedic Outcomes Unit, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Damien Bennett

David Elliott

Gait Analysis Laboratory, Belfast, Northern Ireland

David Beverland

Orthopaedic Outcomes Unit, Musgrave Park Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Objective: To compare the results of single-incision minimally invasive total hip replacement ( 10 cm) to standard-incision (16 cm) total hip replacement in the early postoperative period with respect to functional and mobilizing ability (transfers, mobilizing, walking and stair assessment).

Setting: Orthopaedic wards of a regional orthopaedic centre.

Subjects: Two hundred and nineteen total hip replacement patients were tested between December 2003 and June 2004.

Interventions: Patients were randomized to either total hip replacement through a minimally invasive ( 10 cm) or standard incision (16 cm). A single surgeon performed all procedures using the same type of component fixation. Postoperative physiotherapy assessment and treatment was standardized. Analgesia was also standardized. All patients, physiotherapy staff and assessors were blinded to the incision used.

Main outcome measures: Patients were tested two days post operatively and were assessed for the following activities: transfer from supine to sit, transfer from sitting to standing, mobilizing, ascending and descending stairs and weight-bearing.

Results: The shorter incision offered no significant improvement in patient ability in relation to transfer from lying to sitting, transfer from sitting to standing, mobilizing or weight-bearing. Ascending/descending stairs gave a total time for the minimal incision of 38.7 s against 40.8 s for a standard incision. There was no difference in walking velocity between the standard incision and minimal incision groups two days post operatively (minimal incision = 0.26 m/s versus standard incision = 0.26 m/s) or six weeks post operatively (minimal incision = 0.90 m/s versus standard incision = 0.93 m/s). There was no difference between groups with respect to walking aids at six-week review. The mean length of stay for the minimally invasive approach was 3.65 days (SD 2.04) against 3.68 days (SD 2.45) for the standard approach. This was not significantly different.

Conclusion: Total hip replacement performed through a minimally invasive incision of 10 cm compared with a standard incision of 16 cm offers no significant benefit in terms of the rate or ability of patients to mobilize and perform functional tasks necessary for safe discharge.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 19, No. 5, 465-474 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215505cr890oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. R Hunt, G. Crealey, B. V. Murthy, G. M Hall, P. Constantine, S. O'Brien, J. Dennison, P. Keane, D. Beverland, M. C Lynch, et al. The consequences of early discharge after hip arthroplasty for patient outcomes and health care costs: comparison of three centres with differing durations of stay Clinical Rehabilitation, December 1, 2009; 23(12): 1067 - 1077. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. P. Vail and J. J. Callaghan Minimal Incision Total Hip Arthroplasty J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., December 1, 2007; 15(12): 707 - 715. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Mahmood, M. S. Zafar, I. Majid, N. Maffulli, and J. Thompson Minimally invasive hip arthroplasty: a quantitative review of the literature Br. Med. Bull., December 1, 2007; 84(1): 37 - 48. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. D. Dorr, A. V. Maheshwari, W. T. Long, Z. Wan, and L. E. Sirianni Early Pain Relief and Function After Posterior Minimally Invasive and Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty. A Prospective, Randomized, Blinded Study J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2007; 89(6): 1153 - 1160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Mayr, M. Krismer, M. Ertl, O. Kessler, M. Thaler, and M. Nogler Uncompromised quality of the cement mantle in Exeter femoral components implanted through a minimally-invasive direct anterior approach: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMISED CADAVER STUDY J Bone Joint Surg Br, September 1, 2006; 88-B(9): 1252 - 1256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]