Comparison of Anterior and Posterior Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Effect on Self-Reported and Functional Outcomes

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Reported patient results after total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been described as a function of surgical approach. Such results have commonly been subjective. Though self-reported outcomes are of value and often utilized, inclusion of functional performance measures represents an objective measure to compare THA techniques. <b>Methods</b>: Patients that underwent primary THA surgery at our institution were grouped by surgical approach (Direct Anterior vs Posterior). Patient data were collected pre-operatively, as well as post-operatively at three and twelve months. Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS JR) was utilized, and function was assessed with the timed up and go test (TUGT), 4-m walk test (4MWT), and 30 s sit-to-stand (30STS) test. Unpaired T tests were used to compare mean results and differences between the groups. <b>Results</b>: Functional outcome scores were improved to a similar degree for both surgical approach groups at all the time points post-operatively. At 3 months, the TUGT was improved by 2.33 s for the posterior group, the 30STS was increased by 2.71 repetitions, and the 4MWT was increased by 1.23 s; the anterior group had 2.66 s, 2.49 repetition, and 1.18 s improvements in the three functional tests, respectively. At 12 months, the posterior group had improvements of 2.86 s, 3.99 repetition, and 1.19 s, while the anterior group had improvements of 3.15 s, 3.83 repetition, and 1.23 s, respectively. No clinical and statistical significant differences in surgical approach were noted in these measures. In contrast, the anterior group showed a statistically significant but not clinically significant improvement in self-reported HOOS JR scores compared to the posterior group at the 3-month post-operative mark (<i>p</i> = 0.045). <b>Conclusions</b>: This study suggests both anterior and posterior surgical approaches to total hip arthroplasty yield equivalent functional results at 3 months and one year post-operatively, while the anterior approach demonstrates more improved patient satisfaction than the posterior approach at the 3-month post-operative assessment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-03-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14061935
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.04
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Anterior and Posterior Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Effect on Self-Reported and Functional Outcomes

Craig Hogan, Chase S. Dean, Clayton Foster, Michael R. Dayton et al.
6 citations
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
12.04
article

Comparison of Anterior and Posterior Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Effect on Self-Reported and Functional Outcomes

Craig Hogan, Chase S. Dean, Clayton Foster, Michael R. Dayton, Songyuan Gu
article en
6 citations

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Reported patient results after total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been described as a function of surgical approach. Such results have commonly been subjective. Though self-reported outcomes are of value and often utilized, inclusion of functional performance measures represents an objective measure to compare THA techniques. <b>Methods</b>: Patients that underwent primary THA surgery at our institution were grouped by surgical approach (Direct Anterior vs Posterior). Patient data were collected pre-operatively, as well as post-operatively at three and twelve months. Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS JR) was utilized, and function was assessed with the timed up and go test (TUGT), 4-m walk test (4MWT), and 30 s sit-to-stand (30STS) test. Unpaired T tests were used to compare mean results and differences between the groups. <b>Results</b>: Functional outcome scores were improved to a similar degree for both surgical approach groups at all the time points post-operatively. At 3 months, the TUGT was improved by 2.33 s for the posterior group, the 30STS was increased by 2.71 repetitions, and the 4MWT was increased by 1.23 s; the anterior group had 2.66 s, 2.49 repetition, and 1.18 s improvements in the three functional tests, respectively. At 12 months, the posterior group had improvements of 2.86 s, 3.99 repetition, and 1.19 s, while the anterior group had improvements of 3.15 s, 3.83 repetition, and 1.23 s, respectively. No clinical and statistical significant differences in surgical approach were noted in these measures. In contrast, the anterior group showed a statistically significant but not clinically significant improvement in self-reported HOOS JR scores compared to the posterior group at the 3-month post-operative mark (<i>p</i> = 0.045). <b>Conclusions</b>: This study suggests both anterior and posterior surgical approaches to total hip arthroplasty yield equivalent functional results at 3 months and one year post-operatively, while the anterior approach demonstrates more improved patient satisfaction than the posterior approach at the 3-month post-operative assessment.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(6)
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
12.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.