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

Tailored rehabilitation vs standard post-op: improved outcomes in hip resurfacing patients

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
November 2013

Tailored rehabilitation vs standard post-op: improved outcomes in hip resurfacing patients

Vol: 2| Issue: 10| Number:50| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Recovery of function following hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial comparing an accelerated versus standard physiotherapy rehabilitation programme

Clin Rehabil. 2013 Sep;27(9):771-84

Contributing Authors:
KL Barker MA Newman T Hughes C Sackley H Pandit A Kiran DW Murray

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

Synopsis

80 male participants underwent hip resurfacing and were randomized into different postoperative procedure groups to determine the ideal rehabilitation protocol following surgery. Compared to a standard physiotherapy program, patients who underwent the dynamic tailored treatment specified for hip resurfacing rehabilitation experienced greater improvements in Oxford Hip, Hip disability, and Osteoart...

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