A Swedish hip arthroscopy registry: demographics and development

• DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-2840-9
• Publication Date: 2014-01-24T07:40:37Z
• Authors: Mikael Sansone; Mattias Ahldén; Pall Jonasson; Christoffer Thomeé; Leif Swärd; Adad Baranto; Jón Karlsson; Roland Thomeé
• Keywords: Adult; Male; Sweden; Middle Aged; 3. Good health; Radiography; Arthroscopy; Young Adult; 03 medical and health sciences; Treatment Outcome; 0302 clinical medicine; Femoracetabular Impingement; Humans; Female; Hip Joint; Registries

AbstractPurposeHip arthroscopy is a rapidly expanding field in orthopaedics. Indications and surgical procedures are increasing. Although several studies report favourable clinical outcomes, further scientific evidence is needed for every aspect of this area. Accordingly, a registry for hip arthroscopy was developed. The purpose of this study is to describe the development of the registry and present its baseline data.MethodsA Scandinavian expert group agreed to use a set of functional outcome scores for the evaluation of hip arthroscopy patients. They were the international hip outcome tool‐12, hip and groin outcome score, EQ‐5D, hip‐specific activity level scale and visual analogue scale for overall hip function. These scores were validated and culturally adapted to Swedish. A database was created for web‐based, self‐administered questionnaires. Perioperative data were also collected.ResultsThe process leading to the registry is reported. Baseline data from the first 606 patients collected during a 14‐month period are presented. The preferred surgical technique is presented. The mean operation time was 69 (SD 14) minutes. In 333 procedures, mixed cam and pincer pathology were addressed, compared with 223 procedures with the treatment of isolated cam pathology. Outpatient surgery was performed in all patients.ConclusionThe baseline data in this study can be used as reference values for future scientific work from this registry. Knowledge of the process leading to the development of the registry could be useful to other researchers planning similar work.Level of evidenceIV.