Skip to main content

Table 1 General characteristic of the included studies

From: A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct anterior approach versus posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty

Author No. of patients Mean age (years) Female (%) BMI Outcomes Study Follow-up
Barrett 20131,2,3,5,7 43/44 61/63 33/57 31/29   RCT 3 months
Bergin 20112,4,8,9,10,11,12 29/28 69/65 68/50 26/28   RCT 1 month
Christensen 20151,5,8,9, 28/23 64/65 54/52 31/30   RCT 42 days
Rodriguez 20142,3,5,6 60/60 59/60 34/32 28/24   RCT 1 year
Taunton 20141,3,4,8,10 27/27 62/66 56/52 28/29   RCT 42 days
Cheng 20172,3,4,10,11,12 35/27 59/63 57/53 28/28   RCT 84 days
Zhang 20061,2,5,8,10,12 60/60 61/63 58/53 NS   RCT 3 months
Zhao 20172,3,5,6,8,9,11 60/60 65/62 60/56 24/26   RCT 3 months
Zhang 20181,2,4,5,6,7, 35/48 NS NS 26/25   RCT 6 months
  1. NS, not stated; RCT, randomized controlled trials; 1 Harris hip score at 2 weeks, 2, Harris hip score at 6 weeks, 3, Harris hip score at 12 weeks, 4 Harris hip score at 1 year, 5, VAS at 24 h, 6, VAS at 48 h, 7, VAS at 72 h, 8 incision length, 9, operation time, 10. postoperative blood loss, 11 length of hospital stay, 12 complications (intraoperative fracture, postoperative dislocation, heterotopic ossification (HO) and groin pain)