Secondary Hip Labral Reconstruction Yields Inferior Minimum 2-Year Functional Outcomes to Primary Reconstruction Despite Comparable Intraoperative Labral Characteristics.

PURPOSE: To compare intraoperative labral characteristics and minimum 2-year functional outcomes of allograft labral reconstruction in primary versus revision hip arthroscopy across multiple orthopaedic centers. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter hip arthroscopy registry was queried for patients with completed labral reconstruction surgeries from January 2014 to March 2023 with completed 2-year international Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) reports. Age, sex, and major intraoperative variables also were collected. Patients were placed in cohorts based on whether their arthroscopic allograft labral reconstruction was a primary procedure or secondary procedure (reconstruction following failed hip arthroscopy). One-way analysis of variance was performed on continuous variables. χ2 test was performed on categorical variables. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) also was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 77 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and had complete information. The primary reconstruction group (n = 50) was significantly older than the secondary reconstruction group (n = 27) (47.5 ± 10.5 vs 39.1 ± 8.8 years; P = .001). In both cohorts, most patients had labral bruising, advanced labral degeneration, and/or grade III complexity of labral tearing. There was no difference in any recorded intraoperative findings (P = .160, P = .783, P = .357, respectively). Each cohort experienced significant improvement in iHOT-12 scores (P < .0001). However, patients undergoing secondary labral reconstruction reported inferior iHOT-12 scores (60.1 ± 29.2 vs 74.8 ± 27.0; P = .030). Patients undergoing primary reconstruction were more likely to reach MCID, PASS, and nearly normal SCB (92 vs 66.7%, P = .024; 68.0 vs 40.7%, P = .021; 76.0 vs 48.1%, P = .014, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Primary and secondary allograft labral reconstruction show clinical improvement, but primary reconstruction demonstrates better outcomes and greater percentage of patients reaching MCID, PASS, and nearly normal SCB than reconstruction in the revision setting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative prognostic case-control study.

Evaluating Functional Performance Tests in those with Non-arthritic Intra-articular Hip Pain: An International Consensus Statement.

Background: Non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain, caused by various pathologies, leads to impairments in range of motion, strength, balance, and neuromuscular control. Although functional performance tests offer valuable insights in evaluating these patients, no clear consensus exists regarding the optimal tests for this patient population. Purpose: This study aimed to establish expert consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests in individuals presenting with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. Study Design: A modified Delphi technique was used with fourteen physical therapy experts, all members of the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA). The panelists participated in three rounds of questions and related discussions to reach full consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests. Results: The panel agreed that functional performance tests should be utilized at initial evaluation, re-evaluations, and discharge, as well as criterion for assessing readiness for returning to sports. Tests should be as part of a multimodal assessment of neuromuscular control, strength, range of motion, and balance, applied in a graded fashion depending on the patient's characteristics. Clinicians should select functional performance tests with objective scoring criteria and prioritize the use of tests with supporting psychometric evidence. A list of recommended functional performance tests with varying intensity levels is provided. Low-intensity functional performance tests encompass controlled speed in a single plane with no impact. Medium-intensity functional performance tests involve controlled speed in multiple planes with low impact. High-intensity functional performance tests include higher speeds in multiple planes with higher impact and agility requirements. Sport-specific movement tests should mimic the patient's particular activity or sport. Conclusion: This international consensus statement provides recommendations for clinicians regarding selection and utilization of functional performance tests for those with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. These recommendations will encourage greater consistency and standardization among clinicians during a physical therapy assessment.

Non-Operative Rehabilitation Principles for Use in Individuals with Acetabular Dysplasia: A North American Based Delphi Study.

Background: Acetabular dysplasia (AD) is defined as a structurally deficient acetabulum and is a well-recognized cause of hip pain in young adults. While treatment of severe AD with a periacetabular osteotomy has demonstrated good long-term outcomes, a trial of non-operative management is often recommended in this population. This may be especially true in patients with milder deformities. Currently, there is a paucity of research pertaining to non-operative management of individuals with AD. Purpose: To present expert-driven non-operative rehabilitation guidelines for use in individuals with AD. Study Design: Delphi study. Methods: A panel of 15 physiotherapists from North America who were identified as experts in non-operative rehabilitation of individuals with AD by a high-volume hip preservation surgeon participated in this Delphi study. Panelists were presented with 16 questions regarding evaluation and treatment principles of individuals with AD. A three-step Delphi method was utilized to establish consensus on non-operative rehabilitation principles for individuals presenting with AD. Results: Total (100%) participation was achieved for all three survey rounds. Consensus, defined a piori as > 75%, was reached for 16/16 questions regarding evaluation principles, activity modifications, appropriate therapeutic exercise progression, return to activity/sport criteria, and indications for physician referral. Conclusion: This North American based Delphi study presents expert-based consensus on non-operative rehabilitation principles for use in individuals with AD. Establishing guidelines for non-operative management in this population will help reduce practice variation and is the first step in stratifying individuals who would benefit from non-operative management. Future research should focus on patient-reported outcomes and rate of subsequent surgical intervention to determine the success of the guidelines reported in this study. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Heel Pain - Plantar Fasciitis: Revision 2023.

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these revised clinical practice guidelines is to review recent peer-reviewed literature and make recommendations related to nonarthritic heel pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(12):CPG1-CPG39. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0303.

Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Lower Extremity Research.

Background: A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed for specific lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. However, a consensus as to which PROMs are recommended for use in evaluating treatment outcomes for patients with hip, knee, ankle and/or foot pathology based on the strength of their psychometric properties is lacking. Objective: To identify PROMs that are recommended in systematic reviews (SRs) for those with orthopaedic hip, knee, foot, and ankle pathologies or surgeries and identify if these PROMs are used in the literature. Study design: Umbrella Review. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for SRs through May 2022. A second search was done to count the use of PROMs in seven representative journals from January 2011 through May 2022.SRs that recommended the use of PROMs based on their psychometric properties were included in the first search. SRs or PROMs not available in the English were excluded. The second search included clinical research articles that utilized a PROM. Case reports, reviews, and basic science articles were excluded. Results: Nineteen SRs recommended 20 PROMs for 15 lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies or surgeries. These results identified consistency between recommended PROMs and utilization in clinical research for only two of the 15 lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. This included the use of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score to assess outcomes (HAGOS) for those with knee osteoarthritis and groin pain, respectively. Conclusion: A discrepancy was found between the PROMs that were recommended by SRs and those used to assess clinical outcomes in published research. The results of this study will help to produce more uniformity with the use of PROMs that have the most appropriate psychometric properties when the reporting treatment outcomes for those with extremity pathologies. Level of evidence: 3a.

Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.

Background: A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in the English language for various lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. Twenty different PROMs were recommended for 15 specific musculoskeletal lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. However, the availability of cross-culturally adapted versions of these recommended PROMs is unknown. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify the cross-culturally adapted versions of recommended PROMs for individuals experiencing orthopedic lower extremity pathologies or undergoing surgeries, and to identify the psychometric evidence that supports their utilization. Study design: Literature Review. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for cross-culturally adapted translated studies through May 2022. The search strategy included the names of the 20 recommended PROMs from previous umbrella review along with the following terms: reliability, validity, responsiveness, psychometric properties and cross-cultural adaptation. Studies that presented a non-English language version of the PROM with evidence in at least one psychometric property to support its use were included. Two authors independently evaluated the studies for inclusion and independently extracted data. Results: Nineteen PROMS had cross-culturally adapted and translated language versions. The KOOS, WOMAC, ACL-RSL, FAAM, ATRS, HOOS, OHS, MOXFQ and OKS were available in over 10 different language versions. Turkish, Dutch, German, Chinese and French were the most common languages, with each language having more than 10 PROMs with psychometric properties supporting their use. The WOMAC and KOOS were both available in 10 languages and had all three psychometric properties of reliability, validity, and responsiveness supporting their use. Conclusion: Nineteen of the 20 recommended instruments were available in multiple languages. The PROM most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated were the KOOS and WOMAC. PROMs were most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated into Turkish. International researchers and clinicians may use this information to more consistently implement PROMs with the most appropriate psychometric evidence available to support their use. Level of evidence: 3a.

Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated With Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain: A Revision.

The Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). This is an update to the 2014 Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated with Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain. The goals of the revision were to provide a concise summary of the contemporary evidence since publication of the original guideline and to develop new recommendations or revise previously published recommendations to support evidence-based practice. This current CPG covers pathoanatomical features, clinical course, prognosis, diagnosis, examination, and physical therapy interventions in the management of nonarthritic hip joint pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):CPG1-CPG70. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0302.

The 2022 International Society for Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS): an international consensus statement.

The 2022 International Society of Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) was intended to present a physiotherapy consensus on the assessment and surgical and non-surgical physiotherapy management of patients with GTPS. The panel consisted of 15 physiotherapists and eight orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, there is a lack of high-quality literature supporting non-operative and operative physiotherapy management. Therefore, a group of physiotherapists who specialize in the treatment of non-arthritic hip pathology created this consensus statement regarding physiotherapy management of GTPS. The consensus was conducted using a modified Delphi technique to guide physiotherapy-related decisions according to the current knowledge and expertise regarding the following: (i) evaluation of GTPS, (ii) non-surgical physiotherapy management, (iii) use of corticosteroids and orthobiologics and (iv) surgical indications and post-operative physiotherapy management.

Comparison of the PROMIS and iHOT-12 in Determining Satisfaction Levels After Hip Arthroscopy for FAIS.

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has not been fully evaluated for outcomes assessment after hip arthroscopy to correct femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) subscales with the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) to define patients with 3 unique substantial clinical benefit (SCB) scores-patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1 year after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. We hypothesized that the iHOT-12 would be more accurate than the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales in identifying these 3 patient groups. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: We reviewed the records of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAIS at 3 centers from January 2019 through June 2021 and had 1-year clinical and radiographic follow-up data. Patients completed the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, and PROMIS-PI on initial assessment and at 1 year (±30 days) postoperatively. Postoperative satisfaction was reported on an 11-category scale with anchors defined as "0% satisfied" and "100% satisfied." Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to determine the absolute SCB values for the iHOT-12 and PROMIS subscales that would most accurately identify those patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction. Area under the curve (AUC) values and 95% CIs for the 3 instruments were compared. Results: Included were 163 patients (111 [68%] women and 52 [32%] men), with a mean age of 26.1 years. Corresponding absolute SCB scores for patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction were as follows: iHOT-12, 68.4, 72.1, 74.7; PROMIS-PF, 45, 47.7, 49.9; and PROMIS-PI, 55.9, 52.4, 51.9. The AUC ranged between 0.67 and 0.82, with overlapping 95% CIs indicating a minimal difference in accuracy between the 3 instruments. Sensitivity and specificity values ranged between 0.61 and 0.82. Conclusion: The PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales were as accurate as the iHOT-12 in defining absolute SCB scores for patients reporting ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1-year follow-up after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

Lateral Elbow Pain and Muscle Function Impairments.

Although often described as a self-limiting condition and likely to resolve on its own, high recurrence rates and extended sick leave frame a need for effective non-surgical treatment for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy. The interrelationship of histological and structural changes to the tendon, the associated impairments in motor control, and potential changes in pain processing may all drive symptoms. This clinical practice guideline covers the epidemiology, functional anatomy and pathophysiology, risk factors, clinical course, prognosis, differential diagnosis, tests and measures, and interventions for managing lateral elbow tendinopathy in the physical therapy clinic. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(12):CPG1-CPG111. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.0302.

Rehabilitation Guidelines for Use Following a Periacetabular Osteotomy (PAO): A North American Based Delphi Consensus.

Background: Treatment of acetabular dysplasia with a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has been shown to improve long term outcomes and is considered the gold standard in the setting of symptomatic hip dysplasia in patients younger than 35 years of age. Post-operative rehabilitation following a PAO plays an important role in helping patients return to their prior level of function and reduce the impact of strength deficits that may persist. Currently, there is a paucity of research supporting post-operative rehabilitation guidelines. The purpose of this study is to present expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines to reduce practice variation following a PAO. Methods: A panel of 16 physiotherapists from across the United States and Canada who were identified as experts in PAO rehabilitation by high-volume hip preservation surgeons participated in this Delphi study. Panelists were presented with 11 questions pertaining to rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Three iterative survey rounds were presented to the panelists based on responses to these questions. This three-step Delphi method was utilized to establish consensus on post-operative rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Results: Total (100%) participation was achieved for all three survey rounds. Consensus (>75%) was reached for 11/11 questions pertaining to the following areas: 1) weight-bearing and range of motion (ROM) precautions, 2) therapeutic exercise prescription including neuromuscular control, cardiovascular exercise, and flexibility, and 3) objective measures for return to straight line running and return to full participation in sports. Conclusion: This Delphi study established expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines for use following a PAO. The standardization of rehabilitative care following PAO is essential for achieving optimal outcomes despite other factors such as geographical location and socioeconomic status. Further research on patient-reported outcomes is necessary to confirm successful rehabilitation following the guidelines outlined in this study.

Relationship of Average Outcomes Scores and Change in Status Requires Further Interpretation Between 1 and 2 Years Following Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated a clinically impactful change in patients between 1 and 2 years after hip arthroscopy. Assessment of differences in patient-specific factors between patients who remain the same and those who change (ie, either improve or decline) could provide valuable outcome information for orthopaedic surgeons treating those patients. PURPOSE: To identify patients who experienced change in functional status between 1 and 2 years after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and assess differences in patient-specific factors between those who improved, remained the same, or declined in functional status. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Prospectively collected data for patients who underwent hip arthroscopy at 1 of 7 centers were analyzed retrospectively at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively. Patients were categorized as "improved,""remained the same," or "declined" between 1- and 2-year follow-up based on the 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) minimal clinically important difference (MCID) value. A 1-way analysis of variance was used to assess differences in iHOT-12 scores, age, body mass index (BMI), alpha angle, and center-edge angle (CEA) between groups. Chi-square analyses were used to assess differences in the proportions of male and female patients in the outcome groups. RESULTS: The study included 753 patients (515 women and 238 men), whose mean ± SD age was 34.7 ± 12 years. Average 1-year (±1 month) and 2-year (±2 months) iHOT-12 scores for all patients were 73.7 and 74.9, respectively. Based on the calculated MCID of ±11.5 points, 162 (21.5%) patients improved, 451 (59.9%) remained the same, and 140 (18.6%) declined in status between 1- and 2-year follow-up. Those who improved between 1 and 2 years had lower 1-year iHOT-12 scores (P < .0005). We found no difference in age, BMI, alpha angle, CEA, or sex between groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Between 1- and 2-year follow-up assessments, 21.5% of patients improved and 18.6% declined in self-reported functional status. Those with iHOT-12 scores indicating abnormal function at 1 year improved beyond the MCID at 2 years follow-up. Thus, any decisions about the failure or success of arthroscopic hip procedures should not be made until at least the 2-year follow-up. Failing to thrive at 1-year follow-up may not accurately predict outcomes at year 2 or beyond. This could potentially decrease the perceived need for revision surgery in patients who do not thrive before 2-year follow-up.

Hip physical examination extension loss and radiographic osseous findings in patients with low back pain and nonarthritic hips.

The association between hip and spine abnormalities is frequent, and limitation in hip extension has been linked with low back pain. The purpose of this study was to assess the radiographic osseous findings in nonarthritic hips of patients with hip pain, low back pain, and limited hip extension. Ninety patients (92 hips) were included in this study. Hip extension was tested in the contralateral decubitus position with the hip in neutral abduction/adduction and neutral rotation. In sequence, hip extension was tested by adding passive abduction, followed by internal/external rotation of the hip. A hip extension limitation was defined as less than zero degrees of extension. Imaging studies were assessed for the following osseous morphologies: decreased ischiofemoral space (≤17 mm), increased femoral torsion (≥30°), decreased femoral torsion (≤5°), and posterior acetabular overcoverage. Fifty-seven out of 92 hips (62%) had at least one osseous imaging finding for limitation in hip extension: decreased ischiofemoral space (38/92, 41%), increased femoral torsion (5/92, 5%), decreased femoral torsion (24/92, 26%), and posterior acetabular overcoverage (21/92, 23%). Decreased ischiofemoral space, femoral torsional abnormalities, and/or posterior acetabular wall overcoverage are observed in imaging studies of most individuals with limitation of hip extension and low back pain.

Classification Based Treatment of Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome (GTPS) with Integration of the Movement System.

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) refers to pain in the lateral hip and thigh and can encompass multiple diagnoses including external snapping hip (coxa saltans), also known as proximal iliotibial band syndrome, trochanteric bursitis, and gluteus medius (GMed) or gluteus minimus (GMin) tendinopathy or tearing. GTPS presents clinicians with a similar diagnostic challenge as non-specific low back pain with special tests being unable to identify the specific pathoanatomical structure involved and do little to guide the clinician in prescription of treatment interventions. Like the low back, the development of GTPS has been linked to faulty mechanics during functional activities, mainly the loss of pelvic control in the frontal place secondary to hip abductor weakness or pain with hip abductor activation. Therefore, an impairment-based treatment classification system. is recommended in the setting of GTPS in order to better tailor conservative treatment interventions and improve functional outcomes. Level of Evidence: Level V, clinical commentary.

Hamstring Strain Injury in Athletes.

Hamstring strain injury (HSI) may result in considerable impairment, activity limitation, and participation restriction, including time lost from competitive sports. This CPG includes sports-related overloading and overstretching injuries to myofascial or musculotendinous structures in any combination of the 3 hamstring muscles (the semitendinosus, semimembranosus, and biceps femoris). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(3):CPG1-CPG44. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.0301.

Forefoot Injuries in Athletes: Integration of the Movement System.

Despite the prevalence of forefoot related problems in athletes, there are few comprehensive summaries on examination and intervention strategies for those with forefoot related symptoms. While many factors may contribute to pathology and injury, the presence of abnormal foot alignment can negatively affect lower extremity biomechanics and be associated with injuries. Physical therapists may use the characteristics associated abnormal pronation or abnormal supination to describe the movement system disorder and serve as a guide for evaluating and managing athletes with forefoot pathologies. Athletes with an abnormal pronation movement system diagnosis typically demonstrate foot hypermobility, have decreased strength of the tibialis posterior muscle, and present with a medially rotated lower extremity position. Athletes with abnormal supination movement system diagnosis typically demonstrate foot hypomobility, decreased strength of the fibularis muscles, and a laterally rotated lower extremity position. Interventions of manual therapy, taping, strengthening exercises, and neuromuscular reeducation can be directed at the identified impairments and abnormal movements. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to integrate a movement system approach in pathoanatomical, evaluation, and intervention considerations for athletes with common forefoot pathologies, including stress fractures, metatarsalgia, neuroma, turf toe, and sesamoiditis. By applying a prioritized, objective problem list and movement system diagnosis, emphasis is shifted from a pathoanatomical diagnosis-based treatment plan to a more impairment and movement focused treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

Movement System Dysfunction Applied to Youth and Young Adult Throwing Athletes.

Shoulder and elbow injuries in overhead athletes, especially baseball pitchers, have become more common and result in limited participation. Upper extremity injuries in baseball can occur secondary to high velocity repetitive loading at extreme ranges of motion causing microtrauma to the musculoskeletal structures. With the vast number of youth and young adult baseball players in the United States and the increasing number of throwing related injuries, it is crucial that clinicians can perform a movement system evaluation of the throwing motion. An adequate evaluation of the movement system as it relates to the throwing motion can provide insight into abnormal throwing mechanics and provide rationale for selecting appropriate interventions to address identified impairments that may lead to injury. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to present a recommended movement system evaluation that can be utilized during both pre-season and in-season to assess for modifiable injury risk factors in youth and young adult baseball players. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

A comparison of 6-month outcomes between periacetabular osteotomy with concomitant hip arthroscopy to isolated hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement.

PURPOSE: To compare early outcomes of periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) with concomitant hip arthroscopy to isolated hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and chondrolabral pathology using patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients scheduled for PAO with concomitant hip arthroscopy (PAO + HA) or isolated hip arthroscopy (HA) between the ages of 15 and 30 years old were prospectively included in the study. Based on power analysis, subjects were recruited until there were 22 subjects in the PAO + HA group. These subjects were then gender matched to the HA group. The PROMIS, with six subscales and two global health measures, were completed during preoperative and 6-month follow-up visits. One-way ANOVA was performed to compare intake information of age, symptom duration, body mass index, and Beighton scores as well as preoperative and 6-month postoperative PROMIS scores between the PAO + HA and HA. RESULTS: 22 consecutive subjects undergoing PAO + HA were all females (average age 20.0 years) and matched to 22 consecutive females (average age 22.6) in the HA group. ANOVA did not find a significant difference between the two groups when comparing intact information, with exception of age (p = 0.04). A significant difference was also not identified (p ≥ 0.05) between the two groups on preoperative or 6-month postoperative PROMIS scores. The largest difference in 6-month postoperative scores between the two groups was 4.4 points on physical function subscale. CONCLUSION: Outcomes at 6 months were not significantly different when comparing PAO + HA to HA for FAI and chondrolabral pathology in females under 30 years of age. The more extensive surgery with a prolonged protective period associated with PAO do not seem to negatively impact outcomes at 6 months when compared to HA. These finding support the use of PAO + HA, particularly if the patient and/or surgeon were concerned about prolonged disability, metal health issues, and/or higher pain levels that might be associated with the PAO procedure.

Editorial Commentary: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures With Established Clinically Important Outcome Values Should Be Used for Hip Arthroscopy Patients: Sifting Through the White Noise.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are widely used after hip arthroscopy to track postoperative outcomes. With the number of hip arthroscopies performed each year continuing to rise in the United States, it is important to understand which specific PROM is appropriate for use in clinical practice. Clinically important outcome values (CIOVs), including minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit values, must be determined to allow for score interpretation. Many of the commonly used PROM in hip arthroscopy have CIOVs supporting their use for hip arthroscopy. The selection of an appropriate PROM allows for useful score interpretation at a single time point, as well as changes in score over time, while avoiding response burden to the patient. While the question of "Which PROM should I use?" remains unclear, CIOVs values have been established for the Nonarthritic Hip Score, modified Harris hip score, Hip Outcome Score, and International Hip Outcome Tool. We believe the advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) may outweigh those of the legacy instruments, but future research will be needed to psychometrically prove this!

Surgical Outcomes of Inguinal-, Pubic-, and Adductor-Related Chronic Pain in Athletes: A Systematic Review Based on Surgical Technique.

BACKGROUND: Controversies remain regarding the surgical treatment of inguinal-, pubic-, and adductor-related chronic groin pain (CGP) in athletes. PURPOSE: To investigate the outcomes of surgery for CGP in athletes based on surgical technique and anatomic area addressed. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for articles reporting surgical treatment of inguinal-, pubic-, or adductor-related CGP in athletes. Inclusion criteria were level 1 to 4 evidence, mean patient age >15 years, and results presented as return-to-sport, pain, or functional outcomes. Quality assessment was performed with the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement or MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies) criteria. Techniques were grouped as inguinal, adductor origin, pubic symphysis, combined inguinal and adductor, combined pubic symphysis and adductor, or mixed. RESULTS: Overall, 47 studies published between 1991 and 2020 were included. There were 2737 patients (94% male) with a mean age at surgery of 27.8 years (range, 12-65 years). The mean duration of symptoms was 13.1 months (range, 0.3-144 months). The most frequent sport involved was soccer (71%), followed by rugby (7%), Australian football (5%), and ice hockey (4%). Of the 47 articles reviewed, 44 were classified as level 4 evidence, 1 study was classified as level 3, and 2 randomized controlled trials were classified as level 1b. The quality of the observational studies improved modestly with time, with a mean MINORS score of 6 for articles published between 1991 and 2000, 6.53 for articles published from 2001 to 2010, and 6.9 for articles published from 2011 to 2020. Return to play at preinjury or higher level was observed in 92% (95% CI, 88%-95%) of the athletes after surgery to the inguinal area, 75% (95% CI, 57%-89%) after surgery to the adductor origin, 84% (95% CI, 47%-100%) after surgery to the pubic symphysis, and 89% (95% CI, 70%-99%) after combined surgery in the inguinal and adductor origin. CONCLUSION: Return to play at preinjury or higher level was more likely after surgery for inguinal-related CGP (92%) versus adductor-related CGP (75%). However, the majority of studies reviewed were methodologically of low quality owing to the lack of comparison groups.