View clinical trials related to Osteoarthritis, Hip.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to: 1. Analyze the short-term effects of external center of pressure manipulation of the foot in idiopathic hip osteoarthritis patients during gait on: 1. Gait parameters (spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic) 2. Muscle activation patterns of the lower limbs and back 2. Analyze the long-term effects (during the period of one year) of external center of pressure manipulation of the foot in idiopathic hip osteoarthritis patients during gait on: 1. Gait parameters (spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic) 2. Motor learning and muscle activation patterns 3. Energy consumption 4. Pain, physical function, and quality of life The hypotheses of the study, in reference to the aforementioned study objectives are: 1. Changes in foot center of pressure will have an immediate effect on gait parameters and muscle activation patterns of the lower limbs and back. 2. Long-term manipulation of foot center of pressure, as a result of a year-long rehabilitation program using the AposTherapy Biomechanical System, will result in improvement in gait parameters, changes in muscle activation patterns as a result of new motor learning, improvement in energy consumption, decrease in pain, improvement in physical function, and improvement in quality of life.
Randomized controlled trial using two types of hip stems, SL PLUS MIA (control group) and SL PLUS (study group). We compare primary and secondary stability of both hip stems for radiographic outcome using EBRA (Ein-Bild-Roentgen-Analyse) after a two year follow-up period. Further, we compare all differences in clinical outcome using Harris Hip Score, Oxford hip score and radiographic findings.
The investigators want to examine if specific acetabular liner designs can be a contributing factor to audible squeaking associated with CoC bearings. The aim of the present study is to compare two different designed and well documented acetabular component systems with reference to squeaking and other noises from the hip.
Nationwide descriptive epidemiology survey aiming to determine lower limb OA prevalence, based on a validated method previously used to assess inflammatory rheumatism (rheumatoid arthritis and spondylarthropathy) prevalence in France.
According to Danish and international guidelines the recommended first-line of management for people with osteoarthritis consist of exercise, education, analgesic medication, and, if necessary, weight reduction. It is well documented that exercise has a positive effect on pain and physical function in patients with knee OA, but the effect of exercise on hip OA is sparsely investigated. Aim of the study: To investigate the effects of 1) strength training, and 2) Nordic Walking, and 3) unsupervised home based exercise on muscle function, endurance, pain level, physical activity, and health related quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. The effects of exercise on muscle mass and the mechanisms behind the osteoarthritis, i.e., disease activity, inflammation, and cartilage degradation, are investigated in a subgroup (n=45) of the participants. Study hypotheses: Strength training will have a greater effect on physical function and muscle strength than Nordic Walking and home based exercise; 2) Nordic Walking will have a greater effect on endurance than strength training and unsupervised home based exercise; 3) Strength training and Nordic Walking will have a greater effect on pain level and health related quality of life than unsupervised home based exercise.
This study compares the change in bone density which occurs after hip replacement with different femoral stem devices.
This study compares the change (loss) of bone mineral density (BMD) that occurs in the proximal femur after hip resurfacing and total hip replacement.
Osteoarthritis disables approximately 10% of people who are 60 years or older and compromises the quality of life of more than 20 million Americans every year. Osteoarthritis is caused by the breakdown of cartilage that lines the bones at your joints from daily wear and tear and results in pain and restricted function. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total hip replacement, is currently one of the most successful and cost-effective treatments used to eliminate pain and restore function in those suffering from osteoarthritis. There are multiple ways to perform a THA. The main difference between each type is the point of incision in relation to a muscle on the outer surface of your hip bone: gluteus medius. The incision performed can be anterior (in front of the muscle), anterolateral (in front and to the side of the muscle), or posterior (from the back). Each of these approaches has its own advantages and disadvantages, but there is no evidence available that makes one better than the other. The purpose of this study is to determine which of the three approaches to THA is the most effective. The main outcome that will determine the most effective approach is the functional ability of the patients included in this study at 52 weeks. The investigators will also compare whether the patient's: length of hospital stay, use of assistive devices, need for revision surgery, ability to return to work, ability to relieve pain, complication rate, and quality of life. The investigators hypothesize that the anterior approach will be the most effective approach in reducing the rate of post-operative complications after THA.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the time to total hip replacement in patients with hip osteoarthritis going through both a supervised exercise program and patient education compared to patients going through patient education only. The null hypothesis is: There are no differences in time to total hip replacement between patients with hip osteoarthritis who went through a 12 week supervised exercise program and patient education compared to patients who went through patient education only. Material and methods: 109 patients with both symptomatically and radiographically verified hip osteoarthritis were included in this randomized controlled trial between april 2005 and october 2007. They were randomized to either a 12 week supervised exercise program and patient education (n=55) or patient education only (n=54). Information on if and when total hip replacement is performed will be collected between April 1st and May 1st. Time since inclusion to follow-up will range from 3.5 to 6 years. Data will be collected directly from the study participants by telephone. The main outcome is time to total hip replacement. Status: This study is a prolongation of an on-going RCT (3a-2005-NAR) using clinical outcomes to evaluate the effect of supervised exercise and patient education. The study will be carried out: NAR-Department of Orthopedics, Ullevaal University Hospital.
Using the traditional and hitherto used uncemented hip prostheses achieved good clinical results, but one of the drawbacks is the risk of fracture in the femoral shaft in indbankning of the prosthesis (1-2%). In addition, the bone scan demonstrated that in the years after surgery dropped almost 30% of bone mass in the femoral shaft. This bone loss increases the risk that in the years after surgery, the increased risk of fractures around the prosthesis and in addition to impeding the described bone replacement prosthesis later. The newly developed prosthesis is anchored in the femoral neck and thus not involve the femoral shaft. This ensures a more physiological or normal weight transfer to the femur bone. This contributes to bone mass in long large extent preserved in the years after surgery, so you have a better opportunity later to make a new prosthesis surgery with good results. The new prosthesis should be capable of simultaneously reducing the incidence of thigh pain in the first year after surgery.'