scholarly journals Correction for vol. 372, p.

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. m3715
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Hip Surgery ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Arthroscopic hip surgery compared with physiotherapy and activity modification for the treatment of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement: multicentre randomised controlled trial

scholarly journals Multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to physiotherapist-led care for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome on hip cartilage metabolism: the Australian FASHIoN trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Hunter ◽  
Jillian Eyles ◽  
Nicholas J. Murphy ◽  
Libby Spiers ◽  
Alexander Burns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Hip Surgery ◽  
Cartilage Metabolism ◽  
Hip Cartilage ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI) is known to lead to self-reported symptom improvement. In the context of surgical interventions with known contextual effects and no true sham comparator trials, it is important to ascertain outcomes that are less susceptible to placebo effects. The primary aim of this trial was to determine if study participants with FAI who have hip arthroscopy demonstrate greater improvements in delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cartilage (dGEMRIC) index between baseline and 12 months, compared to participants who undergo physiotherapist-led management. Methods Multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial comparing physiotherapist-led management to hip arthroscopy for FAI. FAI participants were recruited from participating orthopaedic surgeons clinics, and randomly allocated to receive either physiotherapist-led conservative care or surgery. The surgical intervention was arthroscopic FAI surgery. The physiotherapist-led conservative management was an individualised physiotherapy program, named Personalised Hip Therapy (PHT). The primary outcome measure was change in dGEMRIC score between baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included a range of patient-reported outcomes and structural measures relevant to FAI pathoanatomy and hip osteoarthritis development. Interventions were compared by intention-to-treat analysis. Results Ninety-nine participants were recruited, of mean age 33 years and 58% male. Primary outcome data were available for 53 participants (27 in surgical group, 26 in PHT). The adjusted group difference in change at 12 months in dGEMRIC was -59 ms (95%CI − 137.9 to - 19.6) (p = 0.14) favouring PHT. Hip-related quality of life (iHOT-33) showed improvements in both groups with the adjusted between-group difference at 12 months showing a statistically and clinically important improvement in arthroscopy of 14 units (95% CI 5.6 to 23.9) (p = 0.003). Conclusion The primary outcome of dGEMRIC showed no statistically significant difference between PHT and arthroscopic hip surgery at 12 months of follow-up. Patients treated with surgery reported greater benefits in symptoms at 12 months compared to PHT, but these benefits are not explained by better hip cartilage metabolism. Trial registration details Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12615001177549. Trial registered 2/11/2015.

Capsular closure versus unrepaired interportal capsulotomy after hip arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement, results of a patient-blinded randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110057
Author(s):  
Niels H Bech ◽  
Inger N Sierevelt ◽  
Sheryl de Waard ◽  
Boudijn S H Joling ◽  
Gino M M J Kerkhoffs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Hip capsular management after hip arthroscopy remains a topic of debate. Most available current literature is of poor quality and are retrospective or cohort studies. As of today, no clear consensus exists on capsular management after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of routine capsular closure versus unrepaired capsulotomy after interportal capsulotomy measured with NRS pain and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Materials and methods: All eligible patients with femoroacetabular impingement who opt for hip arthroscopy ( n = 116) were randomly assigned to one of both treatment groups and were operated by a single surgeon. Postoperative pain was measured with the NRS score weekly the first 12 weeks after surgery. The HAGOS questionnaire was measured at 12 and 52 weeks postoperatively. Results: Baseline characteristics and operation details were comparable between treatment groups. Regarding the NRS pain no significant difference was found between groups at any point the first 12 weeks after surgery ( p = 0.67). Both groups significantly improved after surgery ( p < 0.001). After 3 months follow-up there were no differences between groups for the HAGOS questionnaire except for the domain sport ( p = 0.02) in favour of the control group. After 12 months follow-up there were no differences between both treatment groups on all HAGOS domains ( p  > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this randomised controlled trial show highest possible evidence that there is no reason for routinely capsular closure after interportal capsulotomy at the end of hip arthroscopy. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at the CCMO Dutch Trial Register: NL55669.048.15.

scholarly journals The feasibility of performing a randomised controlled trial for femoroacetabular impingement surgery

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. R. Palmer ◽  
G. E. R. Thomas ◽  
T. C. B. Pollard ◽  
I. Rombach ◽  
A. Taylor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Physiotherapist-led treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (the PhysioFIRST study): a protocol for a participant and assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e041742
Author(s):  
Joanne L Kemp ◽  
Richard T R Johnston ◽  
Sally L Coburn ◽  
Denise M Jones ◽  
Anthony G Schache ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Group ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Education Programme ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Global Improvement ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Fai Syndrome

IntroductionThis double-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to estimate the effect of a physiotherapist-led intervention with targeted strengthening compared with a physiotherapist-led intervention with standardised stretching, on hip-related quality of life (QOL) or perceived improvement at 6 months in people with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome. We hypothesise that at 6 months, targeted strengthening physiotherapist-led treatment will be associated with greater improvements in hip-related QOL or greater patient-perceived global improvement when compared with standardised stretching physiotherapist-led treatment.Methods and analysisWe will recruit 164 participants with FAI syndrome who will be randomised into one of the two intervention groups, both receiving one-on-one treatment with the physiotherapist over 6 months. The targeted strengthening physiotherapist-led treatment group will receive a personalised exercise therapy and education programme. The standardised stretching physiotherapist-led treatment group will receive standardised stretching and personalised education programme. Primary outcomes are change in hip-related QOL using International Hip Outcome Tool-33 and patient-perceived global improvement. Secondary outcomes include cost-effectiveness, muscle strength, range of motion, functional task performance, biomechanics, hip cartilage structure and physical activity levels. Statistical analyses will make comparisons between both treatment groups by intention to treat, with all randomised participants included in analyses, regardless of protocol adherence. Linear mixed models (with baseline value as a covariate and treatment condition as a fixed factor) will be used to evaluate the treatment effect and 95% CI at primary end-point (6 months).Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved (La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (HEC17-080)) and prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. The findings of this RCT will be disseminated through peer reviewed scientific journals and conferences. Patients were involved in study development and will receive a short summary following the completion of the RCT.Trial registration numberACTRN12617001350314

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document