Group sequential designs in pragmatic trials: feasibility and assessment of utility using data from a number of recent surgical RCTs.

BACKGROUND: Assessing the long term effects of many surgical interventions tested in pragmatic RCTs may require extended periods of participant follow-up to assess effectiveness and use patient-reported outcomes that require large sample sizes. Consequently the RCTs are often perceived as being expensive and time-consuming, particularly if the results show the test intervention is not effective. Adaptive, and particularly group sequential, designs have great potential to improve the efficiency and cost of testing new and existing surgical interventions. As a means to assess the potential utility of group sequential designs, we re-analyse data from a number of recent high-profile RCTs and assess whether using such a design would have caused the trial to stop early. METHODS: Many pragmatic RCTs monitor participants at a number of occasions (e.g. at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery) during follow-up as a means to assess recovery and also to keep participants engaged with the trial process. Conventionally one of the outcomes is selected as the primary (final) outcome, for clinical reasons, with others designated as either early or late outcomes. In such settings, novel group sequential designs that use data from not only the final outcome but also from early outcomes at interim analyses can be used to inform stopping decisions. We describe data from seven recent surgical RCTs (WAT, DRAFFT, WOLLF, FASHION, CSAW, FIXDT, TOPKAT), and outline possible group sequential designs that could plausibly have been proposed at the design stage. We then simulate how these group sequential designs could have proceeded, by using the observed data and dates to replicate how information could have accumulated and decisions been made for each RCT. RESULTS: The results of the simulated group sequential designs showed that for two of the RCTs it was highly likely that they would have stopped for futility at interim analyses, potentially saving considerable time (15 and 23 months) and costs and avoiding patients being exposed to interventions that were either ineffective or no better than standard care. We discuss the characteristics of RCTs that are important in order to use the methodology we describe, particularly the value of early outcomes and the window of opportunity when early stopping decisions can be made and how it is related to the length of recruitment period and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results for five of the RCTs tested showed that group sequential designs using early outcome data would have been feasible and likely to provide designs that were at least as efficient, and possibly more efficient, than the original fixed sample size designs. In general, the amount of information provided by the early outcomes was surprisingly large, due to the strength of correlations with the primary outcome. This suggests that the methods described here are likely to provide benefits more generally across the range of surgical trials and more widely in other application areas where trial designs, outcomes and follow-up patterns are structured and behave similarly.

Multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to physiotherapist-led care for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome on hip cartilage metabolism: the Australian FASHIoN trial.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI) is known to lead to self-reported symptom improvement. In the context of surgical interventions with known contextual effects and no true sham comparator trials, it is important to ascertain outcomes that are less susceptible to placebo effects. The primary aim of this trial was to determine if study participants with FAI who have hip arthroscopy demonstrate greater improvements in delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cartilage (dGEMRIC) index between baseline and 12 months, compared to participants who undergo physiotherapist-led management. METHODS: Multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial comparing physiotherapist-led management to hip arthroscopy for FAI. FAI participants were recruited from participating orthopaedic surgeons clinics, and randomly allocated to receive either physiotherapist-led conservative care or surgery. The surgical intervention was arthroscopic FAI surgery. The physiotherapist-led conservative management was an individualised physiotherapy program, named Personalised Hip Therapy (PHT). The primary outcome measure was change in dGEMRIC score between baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included a range of patient-reported outcomes and structural measures relevant to FAI pathoanatomy and hip osteoarthritis development. Interventions were compared by intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-nine participants were recruited, of mean age 33 years and 58% male. Primary outcome data were available for 53 participants (27 in surgical group, 26 in PHT). The adjusted group difference in change at 12 months in dGEMRIC was -59 ms (95%CI - 137.9 to - 19.6) (p = 0.14) favouring PHT. Hip-related quality of life (iHOT-33) showed improvements in both groups with the adjusted between-group difference at 12 months showing a statistically and clinically important improvement in arthroscopy of 14 units (95% CI 5.6 to 23.9) (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The primary outcome of dGEMRIC showed no statistically significant difference between PHT and arthroscopic hip surgery at 12 months of follow-up. Patients treated with surgery reported greater benefits in symptoms at 12 months compared to PHT, but these benefits are not explained by better hip cartilage metabolism. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12615001177549 . Trial registered 2/11/2015.

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.

Hip-related pain is a well-recognised complaint among active young and middle-aged active adults. People experiencing hip-related disorders commonly report pain and reduced functional capacity, including difficulties in executing activities of daily living. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to accurately examine and compare the effects of different treatments on disability in those with hip pain. In November 2018, 38 researchers and clinicians working in the field of hip-related pain met in Zurich, Switzerland for the first International Hip-related Pain Research Network meeting. Prior to the meeting, evidence summaries were developed relating to four prioritised themes. This paper discusses the available evidence and consensus process from which recommendations were made regarding the appropriate use of PROMs to assess disability in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain. Our process to gain consensus had five steps: (1) systematic review of systematic reviews; (2) preliminary discussion within the working group; (3) update of the more recent high-quality systematic review and examination of the psychometric properties of PROMs according to established guidelines; (4) formulation of the recommendations considering the limitations of the PROMs derived from the examination of their quality; and (5) voting and consensus. Out of 102 articles retrieved, 6 systematic reviews were selected and assessed for quality according to AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews). Two showed moderate quality. We then updated the most recent review. The updated literature search resulted in 10 additional studies that were included in the qualitative synthesis. The recommendations based on evidence summary and PROMs limitations were presented at the consensus meeting. The group makes the following recommendations: (1) the Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) and the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT) instruments (long and reduced versions) are the most appropriate PROMs to use in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain; (2) more research is needed into the utility of the HAGOS and the iHOT instruments in a non-surgical treatment context; and (3) generic quality of life measures such as the EuroQoL-5 Dimension Questionnaire and the Short Form Health Survey-36 may add value for researchers and clinicians in this field. We conclude that as none of the instruments shows acceptable quality across various psychometric properties, more methods studies are needed to further evaluate the validity of these PROMS-the HAGOS and iHOT-as well as the other (currently not recommended) PROMS.

Consensus recommendations on the classification, definition and diagnostic criteria of hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018.

There is no agreement on how to classify, define or diagnose hip-related pain-a common cause of hip and groin pain in young and middle-aged active adults. This complicates the work of clinicians and researchers. The International Hip-related Pain Research Network consensus group met in November 2018 in Zurich aiming to make recommendations on how to classify, define and diagnose hip disease in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain as the main symptom. Prior to the meeting we performed a scoping review of electronic databases in June 2018 to determine the definition, epidemiology and diagnosis of hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain. We developed and presented evidence-based statements for these to a panel of 37 experts for discussion and consensus agreement. Both non-musculoskeletal and serious hip pathological conditions (eg, tumours, infections, stress fractures, slipped capital femoral epiphysis), as well as competing musculoskeletal conditions (eg, lumbar spine) should be excluded when diagnosing hip-related pain in young and middle-aged active adults. The most common hip conditions in young and middle-aged active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without a distinct osseous morphology (labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions), and that these terms are used in research and clinical practice. Clinical examination and diagnostic imaging have limited diagnostic utility; a comprehensive approach is therefore essential. A negative flexion-adduction-internal rotation test helps rule out hip-related pain although its clinical utility is limited. Anteroposterior pelvis and lateral femoral head-neck radiographs are the initial diagnostic imaging of choice-advanced imaging should be performed only when requiring additional detail of bony or soft-tissue morphology (eg, for definitive diagnosis, research setting or when planning surgery). We recommend clear, detailed and consistent methodology of bony morphology outcome measures (definition, measurement and statistical reporting) in research. Future research on conditions with hip-related pain as the main symptom should include high-quality prospective studies on aetiology and prognosis. The most common hip conditions in active adults presenting with hip-related pain are: (1) FAI syndrome, (2) acetabular dysplasia and/or hip instability and (3) other conditions without distinct osseous morphology including labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres conditions. The last category should not be confused with the incidental imaging findings of labral, chondral and/or ligamentum teres pathology in asymptomatic people. Future research should refine our current recommendations by determining the clinical utility of clinical examination and diagnostic imaging in prospective studies.

Standardised measurement of physical capacity in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain: recommendations from the first International Hip-related Pain Research Network (IHiPRN) meeting, Zurich, 2018.

Hip-related pain can significantly impact quality of life, function, work capacity, physical activity and family life. Standardised measurement methods of physical capacity of relevance to young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain are currently not established. The aim of this consensus paper was to provide recommendations for clinical practice and research on standardised measurement methods of physical capacity in young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain. Four areas of importance were identified: (1) clinical measures (range of motion, muscle strength, functional impairments), (2) laboratory-based measures (biomechanics and muscle function (muscle activity, size and adiposity)), (3) physical activity, and (4) return to sport/performance. The literature was reviewed, and a summary circulated to the working group to inform discussion at the consensus meeting. The working group developed clinical and research recommendations from the literature review, which were further discussed and modified within the working group at the consensus meeting. These recommendations were then presented to all 38 International Hip-related Pain Research Network (IHiPRN) participants for further discussion, refinement and consensus voting. Therefore, the recommendations voted on were based on a combination of current evidence and expert opinion. The consensus meeting voted on 13 recommendations, six of which were clinically orientated, and seven more research specific. We recommended that clinicians working with young and middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain assess strength using objective methods of measurement, and clinically assess performance of functional tasks, including walking and running. Physical activity should be quantified using both self-reported and objective measures, and patient expectations of recovery should be quantified prior to treatment. It was recommended that return to physical activity (including sport and occupation) be quantified, and sport-specific activities should be assessed prior to return to sport. The IHiPRN participants were uncertain regarding recommendations for range of motion assessment. Research recommendations were that the measurement properties of range of motion, strength and functional performance tests be investigated, reported and improved in both clinical and research settings. Reporting of movement-related parameters (biomechanics and muscle function) should be standardised and the relationship among movement-related parameters, symptoms, function, quality of life, and intra-articular and imaging findings should be investigated. Quantification of return to physical activity (including sport and occupational demands) is required in future research, and the return to sport continuum should be used. Future research is required to determine the best criteria for rehabilitation progression and return to physical activity following hip-related pain management.

Physiotherapist-led treatment for young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain: consensus recommendations from the International Hip-related Pain Research Network, Zurich 2018.

The 1st International Hip-related Pain Research Network meeting discussed four prioritised themes concerning hip-related pain in young to middle-aged adults: (1) diagnosis and classification of hip-related pain; (2) patient-reported outcome measures for hip-related pain; (3) measurement of physical capacity for hip-related pain; (4) physiotherapist-led treatment for hip-related pain. Thirty-eight expert researchers and clinicians working in the field of hip-related pain attended the meeting. This manuscript relates to the theme of physiotherapist-led treatments for hip-related pain. A systematic review on the efficacy of physiotherapist-led interventions for hip-related pain (published separately) was conducted and found that strong evidence for physiotherapist-led treatments was lacking. Prior to the meeting, draft consensus recommendations for consideration in the meeting were also developed based on the systematic review. The draft consensus recommendations were presented to all of the meeting participants via email, at least 1 week prior to the meeting. At the meeting, these recommendations were discussed, revised and voted on. Six recommendations for clinical practice and five recommendations for research were included and all gained consensus. Recommendations for clinical practice were that (i) Exercise-based treatments are recommended for people with hip-related pain. (ii) Exercise-based treatment should be at least 3 months duration. (iii) Physiotherapist-led rehabilitation after hip surgery should be undertaken. (iv) Patient-reported outcome measures, measures of physical impairment and measures of psychosocial factors should be used to monitor response to treatment. (v) Physical activity (that may include sport) is recommended for people with hip-related pain. (vi) Clinicians should discuss patient expectations, use shared-decision making and provide education. Recommendations for research were (i) Reporting of exercise programmes: Exercise descriptors such as load magnitude, number of repetitions and sets, duration of whole programme, duration of contractile element of exercise, duration of one repetition, time under tension, rest between repetitions, range of motion through which the exercise is performed, and rest between exercise sessions should be reported. (ii) Research should investigate the optimal frequency, intensity, time, type, volume and progression of exercise therapy. (iii) Research should examine the effect of patient education in people with hip-related pain. (iv) Research should investigate the effect of other treatments used in people with hip-related pain (for example: manual therapy, medications, injections). (v) Research should examine the impact of comorbidities and social determinants on treatment effectiveness in people with hip-related pain. Clinicians and researchers working with young to middle-aged active adults with hip-related pain may use these consensus recommendations to guide, develop, test and implement individualised, evidence-based physiotherapist-led rehabilitation programmes.

Hip arthroscopy versus best conservative care for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (UK FASHIoN): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome is an important cause of hip pain in young adults. It can be treated by arthroscopic hip surgery, including reshaping the hip, or with physiotherapist-led conservative care. We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of hip arthroscopy with best conservative care. METHODS: UK FASHIoN is a pragmatic, multicentre, assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial, done at 23 National Health Service hospitals in the UK. We enrolled patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome who presented at these hospitals. Eligible patients were at least 16 years old, had hip pain with radiographic features of cam or pincer morphology but no osteoarthritis, and were believed to be likely to benefit from hip arthroscopy. Patients with bilateral femoroacetabular impingement syndrome were eligible; only the most symptomatic hip was randomly assigned to treatment and followed-up. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive hip arthroscopy or personalised hip therapy (an individualised, supervised, and progressive physiotherapist-led programme of conservative care). Randomisation was stratified by impingement type and recruiting centre and was done by research staff at each hospital, using a central telephone randomisation service. Patients and treating clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation, but researchers who collected the outcome assessments and analysed the results were masked. The primary outcome was hip-related quality of life, as measured by the patient-reported International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) 12 months after randomisation, and analysed in all eligible participants who were allocated to treatment (the intention-to-treat population). This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN64081839, and is closed to recruitment. FINDINGS: Between July 20, 2012, and July 15, 2016, we identified 648 eligible patients and recruited 348 participants: 171 participants were allocated to receive hip arthroscopy and 177 to receive personalised hip therapy. Three further patients were excluded from the trial after randomisation because they did not meet the eligibility criteria. Follow-up at the primary outcome assessment was 92% (319 of 348 participants). At 12 months after randomisation, mean iHOT-33 scores had improved from 39·2 (SD 20·9) to 58·8 (27·2) for participants in the hip arthroscopy group, and from 35·6 (18·2) to 49·7 (25·5) in the personalised hip therapy group. In the primary analysis, the mean difference in iHOT-33 scores, adjusted for impingement type, sex, baseline iHOT-33 score, and centre, was 6·8 (95% CI 1·7-12·0) in favour of hip arthroscopy (p=0·0093). This estimate of treatment effect exceeded the minimum clinically important difference (6·1 points). There were 147 patient-reported adverse events (in 100 [72%] of 138 patients) in the hip arthroscopy group) versus 102 events (in 88 [60%] of 146 patients) in the personalised hip therapy group, with muscle soreness being the most common of these (58 [42%] vs 69 [47%]). There were seven serious adverse events reported by participating hospitals. Five (83%) of six serious adverse events in the hip arthroscopy group were related to treatment, and the one in the personalised hip therapy group was not. There were no treatment-related deaths, but one patient in the hip arthroscopy group developed a hip joint infection after surgery. INTERPRETATION: Hip arthroscopy and personalised hip therapy both improved hip-related quality of life for patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Hip arthroscopy led to a greater improvement than did personalised hip therapy, and this difference was clinically significant. Further follow-up will reveal whether the clinical benefits of hip arthroscopy are maintained and whether it is cost effective in the long term. FUNDING: The Health Technology Assessment Programme of the National Institute of Health Research.

Combining Systems and Teamwork Approaches to Enhance the Effectiveness of Safety Improvement Interventions in Surgery: The Safer Delivery of Surgical Services (S3) Program.

IMPORTANCE: Patient safety improvement interventions usually address either work systems or team culture. We do not know which is more effective, or whether combining approaches is beneficial. OBJECTIVE: To compare improvement in surgical team performance after interventions addressing teamwork culture, work systems, or both. DESIGN: Suite of 5 identical controlled before-after intervention studies, with preplanned analysis of pooled data for indirect comparisons of strategies. SETTING: Operating theatres in 5 UK hospitals performing elective orthopedic, plastic, or vascular surgery PARTICIPANTS:: All operating theatres staff, including surgeons, nurses, anaesthetists, and others INTERVENTIONS:: 4-month safety improvement interventions, using teamwork training (TT), systems redesign and standardization (SOP), Lean quality improvement, SOP + TT combination, or Lean + TT combination. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Team technical and nontechnical performance and World Health Organization (WHO) checklist compliance, measured for 3 months before and after intervention using validated scales. Pooled data analysis of before-after change in active and control groups, comparing combined versus single and systems versus teamwork interventions, using 2-way ANOVA. RESULTS: We studied 453 operations, (255 intervention, 198 control). TT improved nontechnical skills and WHO compliance (P < 0.001), but not technical performance; systems interventions (Lean & SOP, 2 & 3) improved nontechnical skills and technical performance (P < 0.001) but improved WHO compliance less. Combined interventions (4 & 5) improved all performance measures except WHO time-out attempts, whereas single approaches (1 & 2 & 3) improved WHO compliance less (P < 0.001) and failed to improve technical performance. CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE: Safety interventions combining teamwork training and systems rationalization are more effective than those adopting either approach alone. This has important implications for safety improvement strategies in hospitals.

Protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing arthroscopic hip surgery to physiotherapy-led care for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI): the Australian FASHIoN trial.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAI), a hip disorder affecting active young adults, is believed to be a leading cause of hip osteoarthritis (OA). Current management approaches for FAI include arthroscopic hip surgery and physiotherapy-led non-surgical care; however, there is a paucity of clinical trial evidence comparing these approaches. In particular, it is unknown whether these management approaches modify the future risk of developing hip OA. The primary objective of this randomised controlled trial is to determine if participants with FAI who undergo hip arthroscopy have greater improvements in hip cartilage health, as demonstrated by changes in delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of cartilage (dGEMRIC) index between baseline and 12 months, compared to those who undergo physiotherapy-led non-surgical management. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial comparing hip arthroscopy to physiotherapy-led management for FAI. A total of 140 participants with FAI will be recruited from the clinics of participating orthopaedic surgeons, and randomly allocated to receive either surgery or physiotherapy-led non-surgical care. The surgical intervention involves arthroscopic FAI surgery from one of eight orthopaedic surgeons specialising in this field, located in three different Australian cities. The physiotherapy-led non-surgical management is an individualised physiotherapy program, named Personalised Hip Therapy (PHT), developed by a panel to represent the best non-operative care for FAI. It entails at least six individual physiotherapy sessions over 12 weeks, and up to ten sessions over six months, provided by experienced musculoskeletal physiotherapists trained to deliver the PHT program. The primary outcome measure is the change in dGEMRIC score of a ROI containing both acetabular and femoral head cartilages at the chondrolabral transitional zone of the mid-sagittal plane between baseline and 12 months. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcomes and several structural and biomechanical measures relevant to the pathogenesis of FAI and development of hip OA. Interventions will be compared by intention-to-treat analysis. DISCUSSION: The findings will help determine whether hip arthroscopy or an individualised physiotherapy program is superior for the management of FAI, including for the prevention of hip OA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12615001177549 . Trial registered 2/11/2015 (retrospectively registered).

How outcome prediction could affect patient decision making in knee replacements: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is approximately a 17 % dissatisfaction rate with knee replacements. Calls for tools that can pre-operatively identify patients at risk of being dissatisfied have been widespread. However, it is not known how to present such information to patients, how it would affect their decision making process, and at what part of the pathway such a tool should be used. METHODS: Using focus groups involving 12 participants and in-depth interviews with 10 participants, we examined how individual predictions of outcome could affect patients' decision making by providing fictitious predictions to patients at different stages of treatment. A thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Our results demonstrate several interesting findings. Firstly, patients who have received information from friends and family are unwilling to adjust their expectation of outcome down (i.e. to a worse outcome), but highly willing to adjust it up (to a better outcome). This is an example of the optimism bias, and suggests that the effect on expectation of a poor outcome prediction would be blunted. Secondly, patients generally wanted a "bottom line" outcome, rather than lots of detail. Thirdly, patients who were earlier in their treatment for osteoarthritis were more likely to find the information useful, and it was more likely to affect their decision, than patients later in their treatment pathway. CONCLUSION: This research suggest that an outcome prediction tool would have most effect targeted towards people at the start of their treatment pathway, with a "bottom line" prediction of outcome. However, any effect on expectation and decision making of a poor outcome prediction is likely to be blunted by the optimism bias. These findings merit replication in a larger sample size.

Hip morphology in elite golfers: asymmetry between lead and trail hips.

AIM: During a golf swing, the lead hip (left hip in a right-handed player) rotates rapidly from external to internal rotation, while the opposite occurs in the trail hip. This study assessed the morphology and pathology of golfers' hips comparing lead and trail hips. METHODS: A cohort of elite golfers were invited to undergo MRI of their hips. Hip morphology was evaluated by measuring acetabular depth (pincer shape=negative measure), femoral neck antetorsion (retrotorsion=negative measure) and α angles (cam morphology defined as α angle >55° anteriorly) around the axis of the femoral neck. Consultant musculoskeletal radiologists determined the presence of intra-articular pathology. RESULTS: 55 players (mean age 28 years, 52 left hip lead) underwent MRI. No player had pincer morphology, 2 (3.6%) had femoral retrotorsion and 9 (16%) had cam morphology. 7 trail hips and 2 lead hips had cam morphology (p=0.026). Lead hip femoral neck antetorsion was 16.7° compared with 13.0° in the trail hip (p<0.001). The α angles around the femoral neck were significantly lower in the lead compared with trail hips (p<0.001), with the greatest difference noted in the anterosuperior portion of the head neck junction; 53° vs 58° (p<0.001) and 43° vs 47° (p<0.001). 37% of trail and 16% of lead hips (p=0.038) had labral tears. CONCLUSIONS: Golfers' lead and trail hips have different morphology. This is the first time side-to-side asymmetry of cam prevalence has been reported. The trail hip exhibited a higher prevalence of labral tears.

Professional golfers' hips: prevalence and predictors of hip pain with clinical and MR examinations.

AIMS: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of hip pain in professional golfers, comparing the lead (left hip in right-handed golfer) and trail hips, and to establish what player characteristics predicted hip symptoms. METHODS: Male elite professional golf players were invited to complete questionnaires and undergo clinical and MR examinations while attending the Scottish Hydro Challenge 2015. Questionnaires determined player demographics, self-reported hip pain and an International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT12) score (hip-related quality of life). Clinical examinations determined hip range of motion and the presence of a positive impingement test. MR scans determined the presence of labral pathology and player hip morphology with measures of α angle (cam), acetabular depth (pincer) and femoral neck antetorsion. RESULTS: A total of 109 (70% of tournament field) of players completed questionnaires, 73 (47%) underwent clinical examination and 55 (35%) underwent MR examination. 19.3% of players reported of hip pain. 11.9% of lead and 9.1% of trail hips were painful (p=0.378), iHOT12 scores were lower in the lead (94.1) compared to the trail hip (95.3) (p=0.007). Stepwise multiple linear regression modelling was able to predict 20.7% of the variance in iHOT12 scores with mean α angles between 12 and 3 o'clock, and increasing age-significant variables (R(2)=0.207, p<0.001; ß=-0.502, p<0.001 and ß=-0.399, p=0.031, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: 19.3% of male professional golfers reported hip pain. The presence of an increasing α angle and increasing age were significant predictors of reduced hip-related quality of life.

Personalised Hip Therapy: development of a non-operative protocol to treat femoroacetabular impingement syndrome in the FASHIoN randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is increasingly recognised as a cause of hip pain. As part of the design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of arthroscopic surgery for FAI syndrome, we developed a protocol for non-operative care and evaluated its feasibility. METHODS: In phase one, we developed a protocol for non-operative care for FAI in the UK National Health Service (NHS), through a process of systematic review and consensus gathering. In phase two, the protocol was tested in an internal pilot RCT for protocol adherence and adverse events. RESULTS: The final protocol, called Personalised Hip Therapy (PHT), consists of four core components led by physiotherapists: detailed patient assessment, education and advice, help with pain relief and an exercise-based programme that is individualised, supervised and progressed over time. PHT is delivered over 12-26 weeks in 6-10 physiotherapist-patient contacts, supplemented by a home exercise programme. In the pilot RCT, 42 patients were recruited and 21 randomised to PHT. Review of treatment case report forms, completed by physiotherapists, showed that 13 patients (62%) received treatment that had closely followed the PHT protocol. 13 patients reported some muscle soreness at 6 weeks, but there were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: PHT provides a structure for the non-operative care of FAI and offers guidance to clinicians and researchers in an evolving area with limited evidence. PHT was deliverable within the National Health Service, is safe, and now forms the comparator to arthroscopic surgery in the UK FASHIoN trial (ISRCTN64081839). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 09754699.

Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous taxonomy of groin injuries in athletes adds confusion to this complicated area. AIM: The 'Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes' was convened to attempt to resolve this problem. Our aim was to agree on a standard terminology, along with accompanying definitions. METHODS: A one-day agreement meeting was held on 4 November 2014. Twenty-four international experts from 14 different countries participated. Systematic reviews were performed to give an up-to-date synthesis of the current evidence on major topics concerning groin pain in athletes. All members participated in a Delphi questionnaire prior to the meeting. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement was reached on the following terminology. The classification system has three major subheadings of groin pain in athletes: 1. Defined clinical entities for groin pain: Adductor-related, iliopsoas-related, inguinal-related and pubic-related groin pain. 2. Hip-related groin pain. 3. Other causes of groin pain in athletes. The definitions are included in this paper. CONCLUSIONS: The Doha agreement meeting on terminology and definitions in groin pain in athletes reached a consensus on a clinically based taxonomy using three major categories. These definitions and terminology are based on history and physical examination to categorise athletes, making it simple and suitable for both clinical practice and research.

Microvascular blood flow in normal and pathologic rotator cuffs.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular blood flow in the tendon plays an important role in the pathogenesis of rotator cuff abnormalities. There are conflicting views about the presence of a hypovascular zone in the supraspinatus tendon. Besides, no studies have looked at the pattern of blood flow around a partial-thickness tear. Our aim was to measure microvascular blood flow in normal and a range of pathologic rotator cuff tendons using laser doppler flowmetry. METHODS: A total of 120 patients having arthroscopic shoulder surgery were divided into 4 equal groups on the basis of their intraoperative diagnosis: normal rotator cuff, subacromial impingement syndrome, and partial-thickness or full-thickness rotator cuff tear. Microvascular blood flow was measured at 5 different regions of each cuff using a laser doppler probe. The values were compared to assess variability within and between individuals. RESULTS: Total blood flow was greater in the normal rotator cuff group compared with the groups with pathologic rotator cuffs, with the largest difference seen in the subacromial impingement group. Within individuals, blood flow was highest at the musculotendinous junction and lowest at the lateral insertional part of the tendon. Among groups, the blood flow was significantly lower at the anteromedial and posteromedial cuff in the groups with impingement and full-thickness tears compared with the group with normal cuff. CONCLUSION: Real-time in vivo laser doppler analysis has shown that microvascular blood flow is not uniform throughout the supraspinatus tendon. Blood flow in the pathologic supraspinatus tendon was significantly lower compared with the normal tendon.

Arthroscopy in knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review of the literature.

Knee arthroscopy has historically been a common treatment for knee osteoarthritis. A Cochrane review of the literature up to 2006 has resulted in guidance that arthroscopy is not effective in knee osteoarthritis. It cited that deficiencies in the evidence base prevented widespread acceptance of the recommendations. The aim of this review is to update the evidence base for the efficacy of arthroscopy in knee osteoarthritis. The authors searched CINHAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials that compared arthroscopic surgery in knee osteoarthritis with a control group (e.g. lavage, best medical care). The primary outcome measure was patient reported functional outcome. The study methodology was registered on Prospero, a systematic review register: Registration number CRD42012002891. Five randomised controlled trials included 516 patients, almost double the 271 episodes contained in previous reviews. Two high quality studies, according to the Jadad classification, published since the Cochrane review, addressed many of the methodological flaws criticised in previous reviews. However, certain subgroup analyses (e.g. patients with meniscal tears and mechanical symptoms) are still underpowered.

Surgery for treating hip impingement (femoroacetabular impingement).

BACKGROUND: Surgery is sometimes recommended for femoroacetabular impingement where non-operative interventions have failed. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and safety of surgery for femoroacetabular impingement. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 11); MEDLINE (Ovid) (1946 to 19 November 2013); and EMBASE (Ovid) (1980 to 19 November 2013) for studies, unrestricted by language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing surgical intervention compared with placebo treatment, non-operative treatment or no treatment in adults with femoroacetabular impingement. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: There were no studies that met the inclusion criteria, with 11 studies that were excluded following detailed review. There were four ongoing studies identified that may meet the inclusion criteria when they are completed; the results from these ongoing studies may begin to become available within the next five years. Three of the four ongoing studies are comparing hip arthroscopy versus non-operative care. The fourth study is comparing hip arthroscopy versus a sham arthroscopic hip procedure. All of the ongoing studies are recording at least one of our preferred clinical outcome measures for benefit and safety. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no high quality evidence examining the effectiveness of surgery for femoroacetabular impingement. There are four ongoing studies, which may provide evidence for the benefit and safety of this type of surgery in the future.

Development of an outcome prediction tool for patients considering a total knee replacement--the Knee Outcome Prediction Study (KOPS).

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis affects 10% of the UK population over 55 years, resulting in pain and decreased quality of life. Knee replacement surgery has a proven benefit, with over 85,000 performed each year in the UK; however, approximately 17% of people are dissatisfied after surgery. Consequently, some Primary Care Trusts have reduced the funding available for knee replacements.Most previous work has focused on the effect of different prostheses and treatment protocols on patient's outcome. However, this has been unable to account for all the variability and there is growing evidence that patient factors may significantly affect outcome. How to identify these at risk patients has been identified as a research priority by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence, the British Orthopedic Association, and the National Joint Registry.The aim of this study is to develop a clinically appropriate outcome prediction tool based on measurable predictors affecting outcome. METHODS/DESIGN: We propose a prospective cohort study, designed to develop and validate an outcome prediction tool based on patient factors.Six hundred patients who are scheduled for total knee replacement secondary to primary osteoarthritis will be recruited before surgery from all six hospitals (NHS and private) that provide total knee replacements to the population of Coventry and Warwickshire (UK). Patients will complete a baseline assessment of patient factors before their operation and will be followed up at 6 and 12 months post surgery. DISCUSSION: A clinically appropriate outcome prediction tool will allow patients to make a more informed decision regarding surgery. Aligning patient expectations with a realistic prediction of outcome should improve satisfaction. Ultimately, this project is likely to inform national policy making and regional service provision.

Ultrasound dimensions of the rotator cuff in young healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: No studies have looked at the rotator cuff dimensions in the young healthy population using ultrasonography. Our aim is to define the ultrasound dimensions of the rotator cuff in the healthy young adult population and explore correlations with other patient characteristics. METHODS: Thirty male and 30 female healthy volunteers (aged 18-40 years), with no shoulder problems, underwent ultrasound assessment of both shoulders by a musculoskeletal radiologist. The dimensions of the rotator cuff, deltoid, and biceps were measured in a standardized manner. RESULTS: A total of 120 shoulders were scanned. The mean maximum width of the supraspinatus footprint was 14.9 mm in men and 13.5 mm in women (P < .001). The mean thickness of the supraspinatus tendon was 4.9 mm in women and 5.6 mm in men. The mean thickness of the subscapularis was 4.4 in men and 3.8 mm in women and for the infraspinatus was 4.9 mm in men and 4.4 mm in women. There was no correlation between height, weight, biceps, or deltoid thickness with any tendon measurements. Apart from supraspinatus tendon thickness, the difference between dominant and nondominant shoulders in the same sex was not significant for any other tendon dimensions. CONCLUSION: This study has defined the dimensions of the rotator cuff in the young healthy adult, which has not been previously published. This is important for the documentation of normal ultrasound anatomy of the rotator cuff and also demonstrates that the asymptomatic contralateral shoulder can and should be used to estimate the expected dimensions.