Logo of annrheumdAnnals of the Rheumatic DiseasesVisit this articleSubmit a manuscriptReceive email alertsContact usBMJ
Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Oct; 62(10): 923–930.
PMCID: PMC1754324

Predictors of patient relevant outcome after total hip replacement for osteoarthritis: a prospective study


Objectives: To investigate prospectively long term patient relevant outcomes after unilateral total hip replacement (THR) for osteoarthritis (OA). To identify non-responders to this intervention and patient related predictors of unsatisfactory outcome.

Methods: A case-control study comparing health related quality of life of 219 patients (mean age 71) after THR with that of a matched reference group of 117 subjects without hip complaints recruited from the community. Patients and reference group answered SF-36 and WOMAC questionnaires preoperatively, at 3, 6, 12 months, and at 3.6 years (range 26–65 months) postoperatively. Supplementary questions were asked at the final follow up.

Results: 198/211 (94%) of the patients and 83/109 (76%) of the reference group participated at the final follow up. At follow up, the only difference between the two groups in the SF-36 was physical function, where patients scored worse. Patients also reported worse WOMAC function. 31% of the patients had improved by <10/100 WOMAC score points for pain and/or function at final follow up, compared with preoperatively. More pain preoperatively and higher age and postoperative low back pain predicted a worse outcome in WOMAC function.

Conclusion: 3.6 years after THR for OA, health related quality of life was similar for patients and reference group except for function, where patients had worse function. Higher age and more pain preoperatively predicted a poor outcome. Patients with hip OA with musculoskeletal comorbidities, such as low back pain and OA of the non-operated hip, have less long term functional improvement after THR.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (279K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Herberts P, Malchau H. Long-term registration has improved the quality of hip replacement: a review of the Swedish THR Register comparing 160,000 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000 Apr;71(2):111–121. [PubMed]
  • Pendleton A, Arden N, Dougados M, Doherty M, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma JW, Cluzeau F, Cooper C, Dieppe PA, Günther KP, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT). Ann Rheum Dis. 2000 Dec;59(12):936–944. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Birtwistle SJ, Wilson K, Porter ML. Long-term survival analysis of total hip replacement. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1996 May;78(3 ):180–183. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Callaghan JJ, Albright JC, Goetz DD, Olejniczak JP, Johnston RC. Charnley total hip arthroplasty with cement. Minimum twenty-five-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Apr;82(4):487–497. [PubMed]
  • Britton AR, Murray DW, Bulstrode CJ, McPherson K, Denham RA. Pain levels after total hip replacement: their use as endpoints for survival analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Jan;79(1):93–98. [PubMed]
  • Sangha O. Epidemiology of rheumatic diseases. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000 Dec;39 (Suppl 2):3–12. [PubMed]
  • Altman RD, Hochberg M, Murphy WA, Jr, Wolfe F, Lequesne M. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1995 Sep;3 (Suppl A):3–70. [PubMed]
  • Ware JE, Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473–483. [PubMed]
  • Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware JE., Jr The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey--I. Evaluation of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and construct validity across general populations in Sweden. Soc Sci Med. 1995 Nov;41(10):1349–1358. [PubMed]
  • Roos EM, Klässbo M, Lohmander LS. WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients with arthroscopically assessed osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and MacMaster Universities. Scand J Rheumatol. 1999;28(4):210–215. [PubMed]
  • Creamer P, Lethbridge-Cejku M, Hochberg MC. Where does it hurt? Pain localization in osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1998 Sep;6(5):318–323. [PubMed]
  • Bergman S, Herrström P, Högström K, Petersson IF, Svensson B, Jacobsson LT. Chronic musculoskeletal pain, prevalence rates, and sociodemographic associations in a Swedish population study. J Rheumatol. 2001 Jun;28(6):1369–1377. [PubMed]
  • Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969 Jun;51(4):737–755. [PubMed]
  • Söderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001 Mar;(384):189–197. [PubMed]
  • Dougados M, Leclaire P, van der Heijde D, Bloch DA, Bellamy N, Altman RD. Response criteria for clinical trials on osteoarthritis of the knee and hip: a report of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International Standing Committee for Clinical Trials response criteria initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2000 Nov;8(6):395–403. [PubMed]
  • Ehrich EW, Davies GM, Watson DJ, Bolognese JA, Seidenberg BC, Bellamy N. Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol. 2000 Nov;27(11):2635–2641. [PubMed]
  • Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Furst D, Goldsmith C, Katz LM, Lightfoot R, Jr, Paulus H, Strand V, et al. American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Jun;38(6):727–735. [PubMed]
  • MacWilliam CH, Yood MU, Verner JJ, McCarthy BD, Ward RE. Patient-related risk factors that predict poor outcome after total hip replacement. Health Serv Res. 1996 Dec;31(5):623–638. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hawker G, Melfi C, Paul J, Green R, Bombardier C. Comparison of a generic (SF-36) and a disease specific (WOMAC) (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) instrument in the measurement of outcomes after knee replacement surgery. J Rheumatol. 1995 Jun;22(6):1193–1196. [PubMed]
  • Jones CA, Voaklander DC, Johnston DW, Suarez-Almazor ME. Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population. J Rheumatol. 2000 Jul;27(7):1745–1752. [PubMed]
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, Stucki G. Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001 Sep;60(9):834–840. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Stucki G, Liang MH, Stucki S, Katz JN, Lew RA. Application of statistical graphics to facilitate selection of health status measures for clinical practice and evaluative research. Clin Rheumatol. 1999;18(2):101–105. [PubMed]
  • Donovan J. Patient education and the consultation: the importance of lay beliefs. Ann Rheum Dis. 1991 Jun;50 (Suppl 3):418–421. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Fear J, Hillman M, Chamberlain MA, Tennant A. Prevalence of hip problems in the population aged 55 years and over: access to specialist care and future demand for hip arthroplasty. Br J Rheumatol. 1997 Jan;36(1):74–76. [PubMed]
  • Birrell F, Croft P, Cooper C, Hosie G, Macfarlane G, Silman A. Health impact of pain in the hip region with and without radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis: a study of new attenders to primary care. The PCR Hip Study Group. Ann Rheum Dis. 2000 Nov;59(11):857–863. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Söderman P, Malchau H, Herberts P. Outcome after total hip arthroplasty: Part I. General health evaluation in relation to definition of failure in the Swedish National Total Hip Arthoplasty register. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000 Aug;71(4):354–359. [PubMed]
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Aug;45(4):384–391. [PubMed]
  • Laupacis A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, Feeny D, Wong C, Tugwell P, Leslie K, Bullas R. The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993 Nov;75(11):1619–1626. [PubMed]
  • Nilsdotter AK, Roos EM, Westerlund JP, Roos HP, Lohmander LS. Comparative responsiveness of measures of pain and function after total hip replacement. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Jun;45(3):258–262. [PubMed]
  • Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Mar;50(3):239–246. [PubMed]
  • Mancuso CA, Salvati EA, Johanson NA, Peterson MG, Charlson ME. Patients' expectations and satisfaction with total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1997 Jun;12(4):387–396. [PubMed]
  • Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Pehrsson T, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty: a report on 27,372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000 Jun;71(3):262–267. [PubMed]
  • Söderman P. On the validity of the results from the Swedish National Total Hip Arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 2000 Dec;71(296):1–33. [PubMed]
  • Burton KE, Wright V, Richards J. Patients' expectations in relation to outcome of total hip replacment surgery. Ann Rheum Dis. 1979 Oct;38(5):471–474. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hopman-Rock M, Odding E, Hofman A, Kraaimaat FW, Bijlsma JW. Differences in health status of older adults with pain in the hip or knee only and with additional mobility restricting conditions. J Rheumatol. 1997 Dec;24(12):2416–2423. [PubMed]
  • Gabriel SE, Crowson CS, O'Fallon WM. Comorbidity in arthritis. J Rheumatol. 1999 Nov;26(11):2475–2479. [PubMed]
  • Jones CA, Voaklander DC, Johnston DW, Suarez-Almazor ME. The effect of age on pain, function, and quality of life after total hip and knee arthroplasty. Arch Intern Med. 2001 Feb 12;161(3):454–460. [PubMed]
  • Wolfe F. Determinants of WOMAC function, pain and stiffness scores: evidence for the role of low back pain, symptom counts, fatigue and depression in osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999 Apr;38(4):355–361. [PubMed]
  • Harcourt WG, White SH, Jones P. Specificity of the Oxford knee status questionnaire. The effect of disease of the hip or lumbar spine on patients' perception of knee disability. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001 Apr;83(3):345–347. [PubMed]
  • Kosek E, Ordeberg G. Lack of pressure pain modulation by heterotopic noxious conditioning stimulation in patients with painful osteoarthritis before, but not following, surgical pain relief. Pain. 2000 Oct;88(1):69–78. [PubMed]
  • Fortin PR, Clarke AE, Joseph L, Liang MH, Tanzer M, Ferland D, Phillips C, Partridge AJ, Bélisle P, Fossel AH, et al. Outcomes of total hip and knee replacement: preoperative functional status predicts outcomes at six months after surgery. Arthritis Rheum. 1999 Aug;42(8):1722–1728. [PubMed]
  • Lingard E, Hashimoto H, Sledge C. Development of outcome research for total joint arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2000;5(2):175–177. [PubMed]

Figures and Tables

Figure 1
Preoperative (baseline) and 3.6 year postoperative THR scores of WOMAC function for OA. The scale is 0–100, worst to best. Each line represents one patient (n=92). The blue line with triangle symbols represents the average scores for the patient ...
Figure 3
Non-responders to THR for OA identified in three different ways: (a) Defined as patients who scored worst (lowest quartile) in WOMAC function at 3.6 year follow up, (circle A, 23/92 (25%)); (b) defined as patients who reported an absolute improvement ...
Figure 2
Preoperative (baseline) and 3.6 year postoperative THR scores of SF-36 PF (physical function) for OA. The scale is 0–100, worst to best. Each line represents one patient (n=198). The blue line with triangle symbols represents the average scores ...

Articles from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases are provided here courtesy of BMJ Group


Save items

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...


  • MedGen
    Related information in MedGen
  • PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...