Send to

Choose Destination
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Dec;91(12):1550-4. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B12.22326.

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes between hip resurfacing and total hip replacement.

Author information

Department of Orthopaedics, Freeman Hospital, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.


This study compared the demographic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes after total hip replacement (THR) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) carried out by a single surgeon. Patients completed a questionnaire that included the WOMAC, SF-36 scores and comorbid medical conditions. Data were collected before operation and one year after. The outcome scores were adjusted for age, gender, comorbid conditions and, at one year, for the pre-operative scores. There were 214 patients with a THR and 132 with a BHR. Patients with a BHR were significantly younger (49 vs 67 years, p < 0.0001), more likely to be male (68% vs 42% of THR, p < 0.0001) and had fewer comorbid conditions (1.3 vs 2.0, p < 0.0001). Before operation there was no difference in WOMAC and SF-36 scores, except for function, in which patients awaiting THR were worse than those awaiting a BHR. At one year patients with a BHR reported significantly better WOMAC pain scores (p = 0.04) and in all SF-36 domains (p < 0.05). Patients undergoing BHR report a significantly greater improvement in general health compared with those with a THR.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Bone and Joint Publishing
Loading ...
Support Center