The design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of the posterolateral versus the direct anterior approach for THA (POLADA – trial)
Open Access
- 15 November 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
- Vol. 17 (1) , 1-9
Abstract
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures. Because of the increasing number of THAs, a growing demand for faster recovery and a greater emphasis on cost-effectiveness, minimally invasive THAs have been introduced in the last decades. The direct anterior approach is a minimally invasive, tissue-sparing approach in which intermuscular planes are used. Theoretically, this approach should result in a faster recovery of physical functioning and higher health-related quality of life. A randomised controlled trial will be performed. Patients will be randomly allocated to undergo THA by means of the anterior or posterolateral approach. Both the intervention and control group will consist of two subgroups: 1) patients with a good bone stock who will receive an uncemented femoral stem, and 2) patients with a poor bone stock who will receive a cemented femoral stem. Patients between 18 and 90 years with primary or secondary osteoarthritis will be included. Physical functioning and health-related quality of life will be assessed by means of questionnaires. Additionally, performance based tests will be performed to objectively assess the physical functioning. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed by obtaining data on medical costs in and outside the hospital and other nonmedical costs. Measurements will take place preoperatively, two and six weeks, three months and one year postoperatively. There is some evidence that the anterior approach results in reduced tissue damage and faster recovery in the direct postoperative period, compared to the posterolateral approach. However, there is still a lack of well-designed studies that have confirmed the better outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the anterior approach. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the physical functioning, health related quality of life and the cost-effectiveness of the anterior approach, compared to the conventional posterolateral approach. Netherlands Trial Registry, number 5343 (registration date April 12, 2015)Keywords
Funding Information
- Biomet
This publication has 59 references indexed in Scilit:
- High complication rate in the early experience of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approachActa Orthopaedica, 2012
- Anterior Approach in THA Improves Outcomes: AffirmsOrthopedics, 2011
- Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a direct anterior approach versus the standard lateral approach: perioperative findingsJournal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2011
- Age-related appearance of muscle trauma in primary total hip arthroplasty and the benefit of a minimally invasive approach for patients older than 70 yearsInternational Orthopaedics, 2010
- Minimally invasive and computer-navigated total hip arthroplasty: a qualitative and systematic review of the literatureBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2010
- Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a systematic reviewInternational Orthopaedics, 2009
- Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean?Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 2007
- The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ‐5D valuation studiesHealth Economics, 2006
- ICIQ: A brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinenceNeurourology and Urodynamics, 2004
- Measurement of health statusControlled Clinical Trials, 1989