4.6 Article

Comparison of Patient and Surgeon Expectations of Total Hip Arthroplasty

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030195

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Institut Federatif de Recherche sur le Handicap (IFRH) [IFR 25]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Analysis of discrepancies between patient and surgeon expectations before total hip arthroplasty (THA) should enable a better understanding of motives of dissatisfaction about surgery, but this question has been seldom studied. Our objectives were to compare surgeons' and patients' expectations before THA, and to study factors which affected surgeon-patient agreement. Methods: 132 adults (mean age 62.8+/-13.7 years, 52% men) on waiting list for THA in three tertiary care centres and their 16 surgeons were interviewed to assess their expectations using the Hospital for Special Surgery Total Hip Replacement Expectations Survey (range 0-100). Patients' and surgeons' answers were compared, for the total score and for the score of each item. Univariate analyses tested the effect of patients' characteristics on surgeons' and patients' expectations separately, and on surgeon-patient differences. Results: Surgeon and patient expectations' mean scores were high (respectively 90.9+/-11.1 and 90.0+/-11.6 over 100). Surgeons' and patients' expectations showed no systematic difference, but there was little agreement on Bland and Altman graph and correlation coefficient was low. Patients had higher expectations than surgeons for sports. Patients rated their expectations according to trust in physician and mental quality of life, surgeons considered disability. More disabled patients and patients from a low-income professional category were often more optimistic than their surgeons. Conclusion: Surgeons and patients often do not agree on what to expect from THA. More disabled patients expect better outcomes than their surgeons.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available