Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcome Assessment of Non-Arthroplasty Hip Disease

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Hip Arthroscopy and Hip Joint Preservation Surgery

  • 86 Accesses

Abstract

In order to assess the outcome of the treatment of non-arthroplasty hip disease, it is necessary to use validated patient-generated and patient-reported outcome tools. These measures should reflect the patient population with hip disorders who are typically younger and more active. Those outcomes that have been used historically and over time have been replaced with more modern measures have not been included in the second edition of this book. This chapter addresses the who, why, when, where, and what of outcome assessment. It focuses on the published systematic reviews and comparison studies that have determined the most up-to-date and validated tools. This includes the iHOT-33 and iHOT-12 and the HAGOS questionnaires.

If the purpose is to evaluate and follow hip preservation patients over time, then a simple paper/phone/computer-/web-based tool would be best suited. The iHOT-12 represents such an instrument. If the purpose is to perform prospective cohort or randomized clinical trials, then a more robust tool such as the iHOT-33 would be recommended. The HAGOS may be more appropriate for patients with acute sport and soft tissue injuries since it has questions that address groin as well as hip problems or symptoms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 799.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. Lancet. 1974;2(7889):1127–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Williams GN, Gangel TJ, Arciero RA, Uhorchak JM, Taylor DC. Comparison of the single assessment numeric evaluation method and two shoulder rating scales. Outcomes measures after shoulder surgery. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27(2):214–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Codman EA. The product of a hospital. 1914. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1990;114(11):1106–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Codman EA. The classic: a study in hospital efficiency: as demonstrated by the case report of first five years of private hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(6):1778–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergner M, Rothman ML. Health status measures: an overview and guide for selection. Annu Rev Public Health. 1987;8:191–210.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ware JE Jr. The status of health assessment 1994. Annu Rev Public Health. 1995;16:327–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW. A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Clin Rheumatol. 1986;5(2):231–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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;51(4):737–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Byrd JW. Hip arthroscopy: patient assessment and indications. Instr Course Lect. 2003;52:711–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Christensen CP, Althausen PL, Mittleman MA, Lee JA, McCarthy JC. The nonarthritic hip score: reliable and validated. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Griffin DR, Parsons N, Mohtadi NG, Safran MR. Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research N. A short version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) for use in routine clinical practice. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):611–6; quiz 6–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mohtadi NG, Griffin DR, Pedersen ME, Chan D, Safran MR, Parsons N, et al. The development and validation of a self-administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):595–605; quiz 6–10e1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Thorborg K, Holmich P, Christensen R, Petersen J, Roos EM. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(6):478–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH, Scott JA, Rock EP, Dawisha S, et al. Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health. 2007;10(Suppl 2):S125–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Doward LC, McKenna SP. Defining patient-reported outcomes. Value Health. 2004;7(Suppl 1):S4–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Martin RL, Mohtadi NG, Safran MR, Leunig M, Martin HD, McCarthy J, et al. Differences in physician and patient ratings of items used to assess hip disorders. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37(8):1508–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Patrick DL. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs): an organizing tool for concepts, measures and applications. Qual Life Newslett. 2003;31:1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kirshner B, Guyatt G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38(1):27–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(8):622–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Guyatt GH, Bombardier C, Tugwell PX. Measuring disease-specific quality of life in clinical trials. CMAJ. 1986;134(8):889–95.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Streiner DL, Norman GR. In: Streiner DL, Norman GR, editors. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford Medical Publications; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  23. d’Entremont AG, Cooper AP, Johari A, Mulpuri K. What clinimetric evidence exists for using hip-specific patient-reported outcome measures in pediatric hip impingement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(4):1361–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hetaimish BM, Khan M, Crouch S, Simunovic N, Bedi A, Mohtadi N, et al. Consistency of reported outcomes after arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy. 2013;29(4):780–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Impellizzeri FM, Jones DM, Griffin D, Harris-Hayes M, Thorborg K, Crossley KM, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain: a review of the available evidence and a consensus statement from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(14):848–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Klavas DM, Duplantier N, Gerrie B, McCulloch PC, Nho SJ, Varner KE, et al. Patient-reported outcome score utilisation in arthroscopic hip preservation: we are all doing it differently, if at all. J ISAKOS: Joint Disorders Orthopaed Sports Med. 2020;5(4):213–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lodhia P, Slobogean GP, Noonan VK, Gilbart MK. Patient-reported outcome instruments for femoroacetabular impingement and hip labral pathology: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence. Arthroscopy. 2011;27(2):279–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ramisetty N, Kwon Y, Mohtadi N. Patient-reported outcome measures for hip preservation surgery-a systematic review of the literature. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2015;2(1):15–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Reiman MP, Peters S, Sylvain J, Hagymasi S, Ayeni OR. Prevalence and consistency in surgical outcome reporting for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: a scoping review. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(4):1319–28e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Thorborg K, Roos EM, Bartels EM, Petersen J, Holmich P. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(16):1186–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Thorborg K, Tijssen M, Habets B, Bartels EM, Roos EM, Kemp J, et al. Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires for young to middle-aged adults with hip and groin disability: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(12):812.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tijssen M, van Cingel R, van Melick N, de Visser E. Patient-Reported Outcome questionnaires for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of the psychometric evidence. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:117.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55(3):480–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of reliability and responsiveness for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy. 2008;24(6):676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score in hip arthroscopy. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(8):822–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Martin RL, Kelly BT, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(12):1304–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32(1):46–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)–development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28(2):88–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. EuroQol G. EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, McHorney CA, Rogers WH, Raczek A. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care. 1995;33(4 Suppl):AS264–79.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hinman RS, Dobson F, Takla A, O’Donnell J, Bennell KL. Which is the most useful patient-reported outcome in femoroacetabular impingement? Test-retest reliability of six questionnaires. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(6):458–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kemp JL, Collins NJ, Roos EM, Crossley KM. Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for hip arthroscopic surgery. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(9):2065–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ebrahim S. Clinical and public health perspectives and applications of health-related quality of life measurement. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(10):1383–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Brans E, de Graaf JS, Munzebrock AV, Bessem B, Reininga IH. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Dutch version of the Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS-NL). PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0148119.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Cao S, Cao J, Li S, Wang W, Qian Q, Ding Y. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the simplified Chinese version of Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) for total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):278.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Giezen H, Stevens M, van den Akker-Scheek I, Reininga IHF. Validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the Copenhagen Hip And Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS-NL) in patients with hip pathology. PLoS One. 2017;12(10):e0186064.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Thomee R, Jonasson P, Thorborg K, Sansone M, Ahlden M, Thomee C, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation to Swedish and validation of the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) for pain, symptoms and physical function in patients with hip and groin disability due to femoro-acetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(4):835–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Li DH, Wang W, Li X, Gao YL, Liu DH, Liu DL, et al. Development of a valid simplified Chinese version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (SC-iHOT-33) in young patients having total hip arthroplasty. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25(1):94–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Polesello GC, Godoy GF, Trindade CA, de Queiroz MC, Honda E, Ono NK. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT) into Portuguese. Acta Ortop Bras. 2012;20(2):88–92B.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Stevens M, van den Akker-Scheek I, ten Have B, Adema M, Giezen H, Reininga IH. Validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12NL) in patients with disorders of the hip. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015;45(12):1026–34, A1–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Tijssen M, Tak I, Stubbe J, Haverkamp D, de Visser E, Nijhuis-van der Sanden M, et al. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Dutch International Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33 NL) in young, physically active individuals with symptomatic hip joint pathology. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(4):289–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Baumann F, Weber J, Zeman F, Muller M, Lahner M, Nerlich M, et al. Validation of a German version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (G-iHOT33) according to the COSMIN checklist: how much improvement is clinically relevant? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136(1):83–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Jonasson P, Baranto A, Karlsson J, Sward L, Sansone M, Thomee C, et al. A standardised outcome measure of pain, symptoms and physical function in patients with hip and groin disability due to femoro-acetabular impingement: cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT12) in Swedish. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(4):826–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Ruiz-Iban MA, Seijas R, Sallent A, Ares O, Marin-Pena O, Muriel A, et al. The international Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33): multicenter validation and translation to Spanish. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sport Medicine Centre, Faculty of Kinesiology and Section of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, McCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Nicholas G. H. Mohtadi

Authors
  1. Nicholas G. H. Mohtadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas G. H. Mohtadi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Section of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA

    Shane J. Nho

  2. Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Asheesh Bedi

  3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Joint Preservation and Cartilage Restoration Center, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Michael J. Salata

  4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    Richard C. Mather III

  5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, Center for Hip Preservation Surgery Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Bryan T. Kelly

Section Editor information

  1. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Olufemi R. Ayeni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Mohtadi, N.G.H. (2022). Outcome Assessment of Non-Arthroplasty Hip Disease. In: Nho, S.J., Bedi, A., Salata, M.J., Mather III, R.C., Kelly, B.T. (eds) Hip Arthroscopy and Hip Joint Preservation Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43240-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43240-9_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-43239-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-43240-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation