Advertisement

Pavlik harness and Frejka pillow: compliance affects results of outpatient treatment

  • Michal ZídkaEmail author
  • Valér Džupa
Orthopaedic Surgery
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose of the study

Outpatient treatment of hip dysplasia in newborns has excellent results. A combination of general screening with early treatment with a functional abduction device works well. Treatment with the Frejka pillow and the Pavlik harness is frequently used in our region. The aim of the study is to compare efficiency and treatment duration, related to the brace used, and to prove that the choice of an abduction device implies parental compliance with the treatment protocol.

Materials and methods

Data of 286 treated children were analyzed. The diagnosis was made in the first weeks of life by clinical and sonographic examinations during general screening. The choice of treatment device was expert dependent and was involved by many variables. The experience, type of clinical finding and sonographic pathology according to Graf, availability of a treating facility, and the potential cooperation of individual parents were major parameters. The Frejka pillow was used to treat 145 children and the Pavlik harness was used in 137 children. The treatment duration and percentage of infants lost from follow-up in relation to the device used was documented.

Results

The success rate of outpatient treatment was 98.6%. In six patients, the type of device had to be changed during the treatment period. Physiological sonographic findings were achieved in all hips by the end of the treatment. The Frejka pillow was used as the preferred device in milder stable dysplastic hips, while unstable and decentered hips were treated more frequently with the Pavlik harness. Treatment lasted, on average, 95 days and 119 days in the Frejka and in the Pavlik group, respectively; there was no statistical significance in treatment duration of comparable sonographic pathologies. We observed statistically greater parental non-compliance with the treatment protocol in the Pavlik harness group (p = 0.0279; OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.07; 8.5).

Conclusions

Neither of the abduction devices was inferior with regard to treatment efficiency. We found that parental cooperation was an important factor during screening and treatment. The treatment decision and the choice of the brace must be made with full consent of the parents, keeping in mind that comfort during the nursing care may have a significant influence on compliance with the treatment protocol.

Keywords

DDH treatment Pavlik harness Frejka pillow Hip sonography Non-compliance 

Notes

Funding

There is no funding source.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Michal Zídka and Valér Džupa declare that they have no conflict of interest and had gained no benefits concerning the study.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Frejka B (1941) Prävention den angeborenen Hüftgelenkluxation durch das Abduktionspolster. Wien Med Wschr 25:523Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Essa RS, Aljahdali FH, Alkhilaiwi RM, Philip W, Jawadi AH, Khoshhal KI (2017) Diagnosis and treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip: a current practice of paediatric orthopaedic surgeons. J Orthop Surg 25:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sewell MD, Eastwood DM (2011) Screening and treatment in developmental dysplasia of the hip-where do we go from here? Inter Orthop 35:1359–1367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dungl P (1996) Methodological instruction for the prevention and treatment of hip dysplasias (in Czech). Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 63:60–63Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Graf R (1980) The diagnosis of congenital hip-joint dislocation by the ultrasonic Combound treatment. Arch Orthop 97:117–133Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke NM, Harcke HT, McHugh P, Lee MS, Borns PF, MacEwen GD (1985) Real-time ultrasound in the diagnosis of congenital dislocation and dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Jt Surg Br Vol 67-B:406–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosendahl K, Markestad T, Lie R, Lie RT (1992) Ultrasound in the early diagnosis of congenital dislocation of the hip: the significance of hip stability versus acetabular morphology. Pediatric Radiology [online] 22(6):430–433.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02013504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorguel H, Atalar H, Yavuz O, Sayli U (2008) Clinical examination versus ultrasonography in detecting developmental dysplasia of the hip. Inter Orthop 3:415–419Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blom HC, Heldaas O, Manoharan P, Asdersen BD, a SØia L (2005) Ultrasound screening for hip dysplasia in newborns and treatment with Frejka pillow (In Norwegian). Tidsskrift For Den Norske Laegeforening: Tidsskrift For Praktisk Medicin, Ny Raekke 125:1998–2001Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clarke NMP, Colm C, Taylor A, Judd J (2016) Symposium: surgery and orthopaedics. Paediatr Child Health 26:252–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pollet V, Pruijs H, Sakkers R, Castelein R (2010) Results of Pavlik harness treatment in children with dislocated hips between the age of six and twenty-four months. J Pediatr Orthop 30:437–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tegnander A, Holen KJ, Anda S, Terjesen T (2001) Good results after treatment with the Frejka pillow for hip dysplasia in newborns: a 3-year to 6-year follow-up study. J Pediatr Orthop Part B 10:173–179Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Atar D, Lehman WB, Tenenbaum Y, Grant AD (1993) Pavlik harness versus Frejka splint in treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip: bicenter study. J Pediatr Orthop 13:311–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Czubak J, Piontek T, Niciejewski K, Mangowski P, Majek M, PŁoczak M (2004) Retrospective analysis of the non-surgical treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip using Pavlik harness and Frejka pillow: comparison of both methods. Ortopedia, Traumatologia, Rehabilitacja 6:9–13Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heikkilä E (1988) Comparison of the Frejka pillow and the von Rosen splint in treatment of congenital dislocation of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop 8:20–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ömeroglu H (2018) Treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip with the Pavlik harness in children under six months of age: indications, results and failures. J Child Orthop 12:308–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bin K, Laville J-M, Salmeron F (2014) Developmental dysplasia of the hip in neonates. Orthopaedics 100:357–361Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pach M, Kamínek P, Mikulík J (2008) Wagner stockings for the treatment of developmental dysplasia of the hip diagnosed early by general screening (In Czech). Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 75:277–281Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paton RW (2005) Management of neonatal hip instability and dysplasia. Early Hum Dev 81:807–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hinderaker T, Rygh M, Uden A (1992) The von Rosen splint compared with the Frejka pillow. Acta Orthop Scand 63:389–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gulati V, Eseonu K, SayaniI J, Ismail N, Uzoigwe C, Choudhury MZ, Gulati P, Aqil A, Tibrewal S (2013) Developmental dysplasia of the hip in the newborn: a systematic review. World J Orthop 4:32–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pavlík A (1955) The issue of functional treatment of congenital hip dislocation in infants (In Czech). Acta Chir Othop Traumatol Cech 22:33–40Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mubarak SJ, Bialik V (2003) Pavlik: the man and his method. J Pediatr Orthop 23:342–346Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    McHale KA, Corbett D (1989) Parental noncompliance with Pavlik harness treatment of infantile hip problems. J Pediatr Orthop 9:649–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hassan FA (2009) Compliance of parents with regard to Pavlik harness treatment in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop Part B 18:111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsCLPA-MediterraPrague 9Czech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Third Faculty of MedicineCharles University, University Hospital Kralovske VinohradyPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations