To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Direct Anterior Versus Mini-Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty outcomes after 7.5 years

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
November 2024

Direct Anterior Versus Mini-Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty outcomes after 7.5 years

Vol: 306| Issue: 11| Number:74| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Direct Anterior Versus Mini-Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty: Small, Early Functional Differences Did Not Lead to Meaningful Clinical Differences at 7.5 Years.

J Arthroplasty. 2024 01-Sep;():. 10.1016/j.arth.2024.05.016

Contributing Authors:
HJ Roberts ML Hadley BD Mallinger RJ Sierra RT Trousdale MW Pagnano MJ Taunton

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

One hundred and one patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty were randomized to receive either the direct anterior approach (DAA, n=52) or the mini-posterior approach (MPA, n=49). The primary outcome assessed was the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Secondary outcomes included the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) physical and mental scores, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue