31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      UK survey of occupational therapist’s and physiotherapist’s experiences and attitudes towards hip replacement precautions and equipment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Total hip replacement (THR) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures in the United Kingdom (UK). Historically, people following THR have been provided with hip precautions and equipment such as: raised toilet seats and furniture rises, in order to reduce the risks of dislocation post-operation. The purpose of this study was to determine current practices in the provision of these interventions in the UK for people following primary THR.

          Methods

          A 27-question, self-administered online survey was developed and distributed to UK physiotherapists and occupational therapists involved in the management of people following primary THR (target respondents). The survey included questions regarding the current practices in the provision of equipment and hip precautions for THR patients, and physiotherapist’s and occupational therapist’s attitudes towards these practices. The survey was disseminated through print and web-based/social media channels.

          Results

          170 health professionals (87 physiotherapists and 83 occupational therapists), responded to the survey. Commonly prescribed equipment in respondent’s health trusts were raised toilet seats (95 %), toilet frames and rails (88 %), furniture raises (79 %), helping hands/grabbers (77 %), perching stools (75 %) and long-handled shoe horns (75 %). Hip precautions were routinely prescribed by 97 % of respondents. Hip precautions were most frequently taught in a pre-operative group (52 % of respondents). Similarly equipment was most frequently provided pre-operatively (61 % respondents), and most commonly by occupational therapists (74 % respondents). There was variability in the advice provided on the duration of hip precautions and equipment from up to 6 weeks post-operatively to life-time usage.

          Conclusions

          Current practice on hip precautions and provision of equipment is not full representative of clinician’s perceptions of best care after THR. Future research is warranted to determine whether and to whom hip precautions and equipment should be prescribed post-THR as opposed to the current ‘blanket’ provision of equipment and movement restriction provided in UK practice.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-016-1092-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population.

          To quantify the magnitude of change seen with pain, function, and quality of life outcomes 6 months after total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA, TKA) within a community based cohort of a regional health district. An inception cohort of 504 patients who received primary THA (228) or TKA (276) was prospectively followed. All patients resided in the community and were assessed within one month prior to surgery and 6 months postoperatively. Health related quality of life measures were evaluated with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index and the Medical Outcome Survey Short Form SF-36. Perioperative factors were extracted from medical charts. Health services utilization data were collected from regional health databases. Over 75% of patients reported improvement in joint-specific pain and function, regardless of the type of joint replaced. Other health dimensions such as social function, bodily pain, physical function, vitality, and general health showed significant improvement after surgery. Those psychosocial dimensions with modest changes had baseline values comparable to age and sex adjusted normal values; whereas, bodily pain and physical function, which had large changes, had values lower than the normal values. Ninety-one percent of patients receiving THA were satisfied with their surgery, whereas 77% were satisfied with their TKA. The average length of stay was 7 days and the in-hospital complication rate was 0.34 per patient. Large improvements were reported for pain and function after joint arthroplasties, while small to moderate changes were seen in other areas related to quality of life. Patients with hip arthroplasties showed greater improvement in pain and function and were more satisfied with their outcomes than patients with knee arthroplasties. Although pain and function show large improvements, bodily pain and physical function were less than the values reported in the general population.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            An analysis of the risk of hip dislocation with a contemporary total joint registry.

            Dislocation rates after total hip arthroplasty in a community setting have not been well documented. We used a community based joint registry to evaluate hip dislocations that occurred within 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. We evaluated patient, implant, and technical factors associated with dislocation, including primary versus revision surgery, femoral head size (28 mm versus > or = 32 mm), operative time, surgeon volume, surgical approach, age, gender, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and body mass index (BMI). There were 1693 primary total hip arthroplasties and 277 revision procedures performed from 2001-2003. The overall dislocation rate was 1.7% for primary total hip arthroplasties and 5.1% for revision procedures. Patients with ASA scores of 3 or 4 had a 2.3-fold dislocation increase compared with patients with scores of 1 or 2. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis had an increased risk of dislocation. The dislocation rates for primary total hip arthroplasty were 2% for 28 mm heads and 0.7% for heads > or = 32 mm. The surgeon's patient volume, surgical approach, operative time, and body mass index had no effect on dislocation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The dislocating hip arthroplasty: prevention and treatment.

              The dislocating hip is functionally impairing and leads to patient dissatisfaction. The etiology is multifactorial and may include component malpositioning, soft tissue laxity, and component or anatomical impingement. Initial treatment of dislocation usually consists of closed reduction followed by the use of an abduction pillow or brace or a knee immobilizer, although evidence to support these actions is limited. Operative intervention is generally reserved for patients with more than 2 dislocations and should aim to correct the cause of dislocation using a simple algorithm. Proper component positioning is key to prevention of further dislocation, but other tools include modular implants, jumbo heads, and increased offset. Finally, constrained acetabular components may be considered if a patient fails one of the above surgical options.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                01603 593087 , 01603 593316 , toby.smith@uea.ac.uk
                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2474
                25 May 2016
                25 May 2016
                2016
                : 17
                : 228
                Affiliations
                [ ]School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Queen’s Building, School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ UK
                [ ]Division of Health and Social Care Research, King’s College, London, UK
                Article
                1092
                10.1186/s12891-016-1092-x
                4880834
                27225033
                cf7789e1-c5a4-49b9-9c7f-10c773ca3c3c
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 13 November 2015
                : 21 May 2016
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Orthopedics
                total hip replacement,equipment,movement restriction,dislocation,rehabilitation
                Orthopedics
                total hip replacement, equipment, movement restriction, dislocation, rehabilitation

                Comments

                Comment on this article