98%
921
2 minutes
20
To compare the effects of diagnostic labels and their explanations on people's beliefs about managing hip pain. Online randomized controlled trial involving 626 participants. Participants aged ≥45 years with and without hip pain considered a hypothetical scenario (initial doctor consultation for hip pain). They were randomized to receive a diagnostic label and explanation of (1) , (2) , or (3) . Primary outcomes were the beliefs (1) exercise would damage the hip and (2) surgery is necessary at some stage (scales, 0 = definitely would not/unnecessary, 10 = definitely would/necessary). Secondary outcomes included beliefs about other treatments and care providers. Compared to , participants who were allocated to and believed exercise was less damaging (mean difference -1.3 [95% CI: -1.9, -0.7] and -1.8 [-2.3, -1.2], respectively) and surgery less necessary (-1.5 [-2.1, -1.0] and -2.2 [-2.7, -1.6], respectively). Compared to hip osteoarthritis, participants who were allocated to believed surgery was less necessary (-0.7 [-1.2, -0.1]), but not that exercise was less damaging (-0.5 [-1.1, 0.1]). Compared to hip degeneration, participants who were allocated to and were less concerned about their hip and believed exercise and care from an exercise and sports physician, rheumatologist, or physiotherapist would be more helpful, and care from an orthopaedic surgeon less helpful. People who were allocated a diagnostic label and explanation of hip osteoarthritis or persistent hip pain believed exercise was less damaging and surgery less necessary for a hip problem than hip degeneration. .
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.11984 | DOI Listing |
Minerva Anestesiol
September 2025
Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University Hospital of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain.
Integr Med Res
March 2026
National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, The Arctic University of Norway UiT, Tromsø, Norway.
Background: Athroplastic surgery often results in acute post-operative pain, hindering rehabilitation compliance. To improve pain management and functional recovery, guided and motor imagery (GMI) exercises were introduced in hip and knee arthroplasty.
Methods: A pragmatic prospective mixed-methods implementation evaluation was conducted at the orthopaedic department of Schakelring, the Netherlands.
N Am Spine Soc J
September 2025
Spine Institute of Connecticut at St. Francis Hospital, Hartford, CT, United States.
Background: The lateral transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion is associated with transient postoperative anterior thigh and inguinal dysesthesias and hip flexor weakness from manipulation of the psoas and interposed lumbar plexus. However, it remains unclear whether this translates to higher pain scores and opioid requirements.
Methods: Patients who had undergone one- or two-level extreme/direct (XLIF/DLIF), anterior (ALIF), or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) between January 2018 and December 2023 for degenerative spinal pathology were included.
Cureus
September 2025
General Surgery, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, GBR.
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are increasingly used in total hip and knee arthroplasty to improve outcomes, reduce complications, and shorten hospital stays. This involves a multidisciplinary, evidence-based approach covering the preoperative to postoperative period. This review explores the current literature on ERAS implementation in elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), focusing on clinical outcomes such as length of stay (LOS), opioid use, complications/readmissions, and other key components such as anesthetic standardization, use of opioid-sparing analgesia agents, early mobilization, and patient satisfaction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOrthop J Sports Med
September 2025
Section for Sportstraumatology M51, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Part of IOC Research Center Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark.
Background: Management of the capsulotomy at termination of hip arthroscopic procedures in the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is debated. Clinical outcomes in favor of capsular closure were demonstrated in a retrospective study; nonetheless, this finding could not be confirmed in a recent randomized, controlled trial comparing capsular closure with unrepaired capsulotomy.
Purpose/hypothesis: This randomized, controlled multicenter trial aimed to evaluate the effect of capsular closure on subjective postoperative outcomes and revision rates in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS.