Specific or general health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip replacement. A comparison between the Harris hip score and the Nottingham Health Profile.
We assessed 100 patients with a primary total hip replacement using the Harris hip score and the Nottingham Health Profile at one, three and five years after operation. They were derived from two prospective randomised series of cemented and uncemented replacements. Both scoring systems correlated highly and were each heavily influenced by the system of functional classification defined by Charnley. After five years both reflected the function of the implant and the general state of the patient. A higher degree of sensitivity is needed to show differences in the performance of an implant in the short and medium term. We do not yet have an ideal system of clinical assessment and the overall function must always be properly assessed.
Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Surgical Sciences, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg University, Sweden.
G
G
Garellick
H
H
Malchau
P
P
Herberts
D000203:Activities of Daily Living; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000145:classification; D002484:Cementation; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005684:Gait / Q000502:physiology; D006304:Health Status; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010384:Pelvic Bones / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011859:Radiography; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D016896:Treatment Outcome