INFLUENCE OF POSTERIOR APPROACH ON OXFORD HIP SCORE

Abstract

Introduction: Various surgical approaches have been described for the hip joint but the optimal surgical approach for total hip replacement remains controversial. The lateral approach & the posterior approach are the most commonly used approaches.

Various scoring systems are in use to assess the outcome of total hip replacement. Since its introduction in 1996, Oxford hip score (OHS) has been validated in several studies. Total hip replacement has been shown to improve the OHS in several studies but we could not find any studies on effect of the surgical approach on OHS.

Aim: To find out the affect of surgical approach on oxford hip score.

Methods: Exeter Primary Outcomes Study was a prospective non-randomised multicentre study involving six centres across the UK. Ethical committee approval was taken and the study was conducted over a period of five years. 1610 patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent primary hip replacement with Exeter stem and were followed up in the clinics for pre-operative assessment and then at three months, year one, year two and year five post-operatively. Oxford hip score was noted at pre-operative assessment and postoperatively at three months, year one, two, three, four and five, either in the clinics or by post. All data was analysed in conjunction with a statistician using SPSS.

Results: We had 1587 patients with regular follow-up. Lateral approach was the most common surgical approach (n=1143) compared to posterior approach (n=436). Sex ratio for each surgical approach was comparable. Oxford hip scores significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.05) up to four years, with both the surgical approaches. The posterior approach gave a better improvement in OHS compared to the lateral approach for all the four years. The absolute oxford hip scores improved significantly with the posterior approach for the first 12 months post-operatively.

Conclusion: Posterior approach gives greater patient perceived clinical benefit in the first year after surgery which could help in early rehabilitation compared to lateral approach. This should be considered when assessing the best approach for the patients.