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

Table 1 General characteristic of the included studies

Author	No. of patients	Mean age (years)	Female (%)	BMI	Study	Follow-up
Barrett 2013^1,^2,^3,^5,⁷	43/44	61/63	33/57	31/29	RCT	3 months
Bergin 2011^2,^4,^8,^9,^10,^11,¹²	29/28	69/65	68/50	26/28	RCT	1 month
Christensen 2015^1,^5,^8,^9,	28/23	64/65	54/52	31/30	RCT	42 days
Rodriguez 2014^2,^3,^5,⁶	60/60	59/60	34/32	28/24	RCT	1 year
Taunton 2014^1,^3,^4,^8,¹⁰	27/27	62/66	56/52	28/29	RCT	42 days
Cheng 2017^2,^3,^4,^10,^11,¹²	35/27	59/63	57/53	28/28	RCT	84 days
Zhang 2006^1,^2,^5,^8,^10,¹²	60/60	61/63	58/53	NS	RCT	3 months
Zhao 2017^2,^3,^5,^6,^8,^9,¹¹	60/60	65/62	60/56	24/26	RCT	3 months
Zhang 2018^1,^2,^4,^5,^6,^7,	35/48	NS	NS	26/25	RCT	6 months

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)

ISSN: 1749-799X