Observational studyEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Patient-reported outcome measure comparison of two cemented primary total hip arthroplasty implant combinations for osteoarthritis: a regional New Zealand study.
Observational study in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCompare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of two cemented implants in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis in a New Zealand regional joint registry. Identify patient predictors of poorer PROMs.
methodsWe analysed observational data from primary THA surgeries for osteoarthritis performed between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2023, with at least one recorded PROM (n = 1365) from a regional joint registry. We compared preoperative, 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year PROMs in the cemented, highly crosslinked polyethylene Exeter® X3 Rimfit cup (Rimfit) and its conventional polyethylene predecessor, the Exeter® Contemporary Flanged cup (ECF) with the same cemented Exeter® V40 stem. We investigated six patient factors and their influence on physical function, and mental and physical health PROMs.
resultsNo significant difference in physical function PROMs were noted between implants at any timepoint. Both implant combinations exhibited excellent (> 41) mean postoperative Oxford hip scores based on published thresholds (Rimfit: mean 41.30 ± SD 8.46; ECF: mean 41.64 ± SD 8.67). Mental health was significantly better preoperatively and at 1-year and 5-year with the Rimfit based on Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey. Public funding was a significant and clinically meaningful predictor of poorer preoperative outcomes in all PROMs and in both cohorts, followed by comorbidity status. The strongest significant predictor of poorer postoperative PROMs was poorer preoperative PROMs, followed by Māori ethnicity.
conclusionBoth implant combinations demonstrated similar PROMs up to 10 years, but the Rimfit exhibited superior mental health. Public funding, comorbidity status, and Māori ethnicity were predictors of statistically significant and clinically meaningful poorer preoperative and postoperative PROMs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.