header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Systematic Review

A comparison of different selective ultrasound screening strategies for developmental dysplasia of the hip

a systematic review and meta-analysis



Download PDF

Abstract

Aims

To analyze whether the addition of risk-based criteria to clinical examination-based selective ultrasound screening would increase the rates of early detected cases of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and decrease the rate of late detected cases.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. The initial search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases in November 2021. The following search terms were used: (hip) AND (ultrasound) AND (luxation or dysplasia) AND (newborn or neonate or congenital).

Results

A total of 25 studies were included. In 19 studies, newborns were selected for ultrasound based on both risk factors and clinical examination. In six studies, newborns were selected for ultrasound based on only clinical examination. We did not find evidence indicating that there are differences in the incidence of early- and late-detected DDH, or in the incidence of nonoperatively treated DDH between the risk-based and clinical examination-based groups. The pooled incidence of operatively treated DDH was slightly lower in the risk-based group (0.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3 to 0.7)) compared with the clinical examination group (0.9 per 1,000 newborns, (95% CI 0.7 to 1.0)).

Conclusion

The use of risk factors in conjunction with clinical examination in the selective ultrasound screening of DDH might lead to fewer operatively treated cases of DDH. However, more studies are needed before stronger conclusions can be drawn.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):247–253.


Correspondence should be sent to Mr Oskari Pakarinen. E-mail:

For access options please click here