Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Craig Gerrand, Dr Jennifer Holland, Professor Andrew McCaskie
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
INTRODUCTION The introduction of minimally invasive techniques for hip replacement into clinical practice has been driven by the perceived benefits of smaller incisions, shorter in-patient stays and faster rehabilitation. This may be at the cost of higher complications rates. The purpose of this study was to explore the opinions and priorities of patients in relation to these techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS A cross-sectional survey was performed in an elective out-patient setting. RESULTS Of 44 patients approached, 36 agreed to participate. From most important to least important, patients rated the following items in order: 'rate of complications'; 'length of rehabilitation'; 'time in hospital' and 'length of scar'. Despite this, 21 of 35 (60%) responders stated they would accecpt the offer of minimally invasive techniques if made. CONCLUSIONS Patients appear to prioritise long-term outcomes and low complication rates over the shorter scars, reduced in-patient stay and reduced rehabilitation times potentially offered by minimally invasive hip arthroplasty. Despite this, the techique remains popular among patients.
Author(s): Gerrand, C.H, McNulty, G., Brewster, N, Holland, J., McCaskie, A.
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Unknown
Journal: Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England
Year: 2007
Volume: 89
Issue: 7
Pages: 685-688
ISSN (print): 0035-8843
ISSN (electronic): 1478-7083
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/003588407X205431
DOI: 10.1308/003588407X205431
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
