Skip to main content
Download PDF

Early functional recovery outcomes and return to work after primary total hip arthroplasty: a novel patient reported outcomes questionnaire

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research volume 19, Article number: 434 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Clinical and patient reported outcomes are often collected before and after the procedure to benchmark and study outcomes for patients. These outcomes and scores are useful for tracking patient outcomes after surgery, however, the fact that these commonly used measures typically provide information about a patient’s level of pain and function at a single point in time is a limitation.

Methods

We present early functional recovery and return to work outcomes after primary THA from a novel questionnaire administered in a global, multi-center, prospective clinical study.

Results

By 6 and 12 weeks post-op, a large proportion of study subjects were able to perform functional recovery outcomes after their THA: walk without an aid (74%; 94%); drive (76%; 97%); basic activities of daily living (94%; 99%); perform light household duties (91%; 96%); perform moderate-to-heavy household duties (54%; 86%); go up and down a flight of stairs (92%; 99%); put on socks/stockings (77%; 93%); bend down to pick up an object from the floor (87%; 97%); stand up from a chair (96%; 99%); perform leisure recreational activities (54%; 84%); perform primary goal identified pre-THA (69%; 86%). 60% were able to return to work by 12 weeks post-op. These questions showed strong association with the Forgotten Joint Score.

Conclusion

Excellent patient reported early functional recovery outcomes and satisfaction were observed at 6- and 12-weeks post-op in this cohort and is the first reported data using a novel PRO.

Clinical trial registration

NCT03189303, registered June 14, 2017.

Introduction

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has long been viewed as one of the most successful surgical procedures in the world [1]. However, there is increasing interest in recovery during the early post-operative period to help provided distinction between treatment options. One major area of interest has been surgical approach; many studies have reviewed the effect of minimally invasive approaches, including the direct anterior approach, on early outcomes [2,3,4,5]. Studies have also been conducted to help compare early recovery for different implant designs [6], recovery pathways [7,8,9], and technologies such as robotics and navigation [10].

Clinical and patient reported outcomes (PROs) are often collected before and after the procedure to benchmark and study outcomes for patients. These outcomes and scores are useful for tracking patient outcomes after surgery, however, the fact that these commonly used measures typically provide information about a patient’s level of pain and function at a single point in time is a limitation. Some have used traditional outcomes scores, administered each week after surgery to study early recovery [5, 11]. We have developed a questionnaire that allows collection of these early functional recovery data out to 12 weeks post-surgery with a goal of offering a solution with less burden for the patient and provider. The questions we have developed are like those that one would find on a traditional PRO, but we have modified the application. We developed a PRO that allows the patient to record the week when they could first perform an activity after their surgery. This allows us to review the course of recovery over time and not just recovery at a single post-operative timepoint (i.e., 6-weeks). The purpose of this study was: (1) determine how quickly patients could perform functional recovery activities between week 1 and week 12 postoperatively, including return to work after their surgery, and (2) review any potential associations between these questions and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12).

Materials and methods

A global, prospective, multi-center study was conducted between August 2017 and May 2021. Study sites participated from the United States, The Netherlands, Wales, Scotland, and Italy. Informed consent was collected for all subjects prior to participation and Institutional Review Board (IRB), or Ethics Committee (EC) review and approval was obtained for the study protocol and all research sites and maintained through the duration of the study. Patients were excluded if they were being treated for a muscular disorder that limited mobility, if they were bedridden, if they were pregnant or lactating, if they had previous partial or total hip replacement on the study hip, active infection (local or systemic), and if the contralateral hip had been replaced less than 6 months prior. Preoperative assessments included Harris Hip Score [12], EQ-5D-5 L [13, 14], and baseline patient reported early functional recovery outcomes and pain. A PINNACLE™ acetabular cup (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN) was used in all cases with a Corail™, ACTIS™ or SUMMIT™ stem (DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN). Surgeries were performed via posterolateral, anterolateral, or lateral approach with the subject in lateral decubitus position. No imaging or navigation was used to aid in placement of the acetabular components. Date of discharge and discharge disposition was recorded. Postoperative assessments included Harris Hip Score, EQ-5D-5 L, FJS-12 [15], and patient reported early functional recovery outcomes and pain. Complications (all serious and device- or procedure-related) were recorded from the time of subject consent to end of study participation.

Development of the questionnaire

The functional recovery outcomes questionnaire (Appendix A) includes both a preoperative and a postoperative form. The preoperative form is used to establish a baseline. The subject is asked if they can perform a specific activity with available responses of “Yes”, “No, because of study hip”, and “No, for reason other than study hip”. It is important to understand whether the subject can perform the activity in question before their surgery, or whether their health or other factors are preventing their participation in these activities. On the postoperative form, the subject is asked to note within which week after the surgery they were first able to perform the activity, up to 12 weeks postoperatively, or to report “>12 weeks” or “still cannot do”. A response of “N/A” was expected if the subject stated preoperatively that they were not able to perform a specific task or activity for a reason other than their study hip. A return-to-work question was also included to assess when the subject was able to return to work after surgery, and their work status, full- or part-time. Patients completed the questionnaire at their 6-week and 12-week visits. In cases where the patient could complete all activities at the 6-week visit, they did not have to fill out the form again when they returned at 12 weeks. In other words, once completion of an activity was documented post-operatively, the patient was not asked again to address this at a subsequent visit. In the cases where subjects did not speak English, translations of the questions were provided.

Statistical analysis

Clinical assessments were summarized with sample size, mean, and standard deviation for numeric scores and with sample size and percentages for categorical response using J&J’s corporate SAS server, version 9.4. Changes from baseline were tested for significance using the 2-sided paired t-test. Associations between each question and the FSJ-12 were explored using a t-test.

Results

Patient demographics

184 patients were enrolled in the study. A total of 170 subjects were enrolled and treated per the study protocol (Fig. 1). Mean age at surgery was 65.8 (range 35 to 85). Gender was female in 63.5% of cases and primary diagnosis was osteoarthritis for 88.2% of cases. Mean BMI was 29.7 (range 17.4 to 54.6). Additional demographic and surgical details are presented in Table 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Patient enrollment flowchart

Full size image
Table 1 Patient demographics and surgical details
Full size table

Mean Harris Hip Scores (SD; N) were 51.3 (17.1; 141), 84.2 (14.2; 124), and 92.7 (9.7; 143) at pre-op, 6- and 12-weeks post-op respectively. Mean EQ-5D-5 L scores (SD; N) were 0.59 (0.18; 169), 0.79 (0.13; 151), and 0.85 (0.14; 157) at pre-op, 6- and 12-weeks post-op respectively. Mean EQ-5D-5 L VAS were 67.9 (19.1; 169), 80.9 (14.1; 151), and 83.6 (13.6; 158) at pre-op, 6- and 12-weeks post-op respectively. Subjects reported being extremely or very satisfied post-operatively at a rate of 93.2%. Additional details are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Clinical outcomes
Full size table

The following patient reported functional recovery outcomes (Fig. 2) will be presented as the percentage of subjects that reported they could first complete the activity without assistance at or before 6 and 12 weeks post-op (6wk; 12wk): walk without an aid (74%; 94%); drive (76%; 97%); basic activities of daily living (94%; 99%); perform light household duties (91%; 96%); perform moderate-to-heavy household duties (54%; 86%); go up and down a flight of stairs (92%; 99%); put on socks/stockings (77%; 93%); bend down to pick up an object from the floor (87%; 97%); stand up from a chair (96%; 99%); perform leisure recreational activities (54%; 84%); perform primary goal identified pre-THA (69%; 86%). Figure 3 shows the cumulative response rate over time for patient reported functional recovery outcomes. As expected, there was a difference between sides for time to drive after THA. By week 5 post-op, the percentage who could drive was similar (62% for right THA; 60% for left THA) (Table 3).

Table 3 Time to first drive by side
Full size table

For applicable subjects (those working before surgery and those that did not select “Not Applicable” post-surgery), 38% had returned to work by 6 weeks, and 60% had returned by 12-weeks post-operatively. No significant association was found between early recoveries and age, sex, BMI, and ASA risk.

A strong association between early recovery and FJS-12 scores was found (Table 4). The only questions that did not show some level of significant association were performance of light household duties, putting on socks/stockings without assistance, and bending down to pick up an object; this was likely due to most patients having recovered by 6 weeks for these, though for all questions, the mean FJS-12 was higher for those patients that recovered by or before 6 weeks. Recoveries between surgical approaches were reviewed but no significant differences were noted between the two approaches.

Table 4 Associations with FJS-12
Full size table
Fig. 2
figure 2

Functional Recovery Outcomes (% subjects who responded that they could perform activity at 6- and 12-weeks postoperatively)

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

Functional recovery outcomes over time

Full size image

Discussion

To our knowledge, our functional recovery outcomes questionnaire (FROQ) is the first questionnaire of its kind that allows collection of early functional recovery data out to 12 weeks post-THA surgery with a goal of offering a solution with less burden (patient visits) for the patient and provider. The data collection allows a more granular view of patient recovery (weekly) without requiring patients to keep a diary or add follow up visits. Our goal in introducing this questionnaire was to allow providers to gather recovery data during the early post-operative period to help compare implants, surgical approaches, recovery pathways, and technologies to optimize patient outcomes.

It is well established that preoperative function and pain are predictors of postoperative outcomes, especially in the short-term follow up period [16,17,18,19]. Emotional state [20, 21], mental health status [22, 23], less post-operative restrictions [24], and higher levels of activity [25] have also been correlated with better early postoperative function. Gender has also been linked to differing outcomes [26]. Average RTW after THA varies in the literature, ranging between 1.1 and 13.9 weeks [27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Hoorntje et al. [28] showed a mean RTW time of 8.9 weeks, and RTW rates as high as 86% for those who were working preoperatively. In our cohort, 85% of subjects returned to work post-surgery, for all subjects who worked full or part time prior to surgery or could not work due to their study hip. Of the 34 subjects who returned to work, 50% returned to work at a mean of 7.7 weeks.

Rolfson et al. [35] reported that pre-operative anxiety and depression (measured using the EQ-5D dimension of anxiety/depression) was a strong predictor of pain relief and satisfaction after surgery. In future evaluations it could be of interest to review compared to the FROQ. The relationship between pain and anxiety and depression is complex. To better understand the relationship, the factors for each patient’s pain and recovery pathway need to be identified.

Porsius et al. [11] reviewed recovery in fast-track primary THA compared with patient characteristics. In this analysis they conducted latent class growth modelling (LCGM) to improve insight into heterogenous data. The outcome measure used was the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and was completed by subjects 1 week preoperatively and weekly for 6 weeks after surgery. In this study the authors use a well-known outcome measure (OHS) but burden is added for subjects who are required to fill out the entire form a total of seven times up to 6 weeks post-surgery. This approach is feasible only in limited research applications, but the functional recovery outcomes questions that we used for this study allow the subject to complete the questionnaire at their standard-of-care office visits.

We acknowledge that our study is not without any limitations. Limitations of the study include a lack of performance-based functional measures since it has been shown that patients tend to overestimate their functional recovery after THA [36]. It would also have been beneficial to measure psychological factors preoperatively since patients with low levels of depression and anxiety are more likely to have better early functional outcomes [22]. It would have been beneficial to know analgesia information for patients post-operatively as this is an important factor to consider for functional recovery. Potential recall bias is another limitation. Since the form was administered at the 6- and 12-week visits, there is potential that patients had difficulty accurately recalling when they were able to complete functional activities post-surgery. Another limitation of this study is a lack of comparative cohort or control group. There is also inherent difficulty in collecting detailed baseline status for our functional recovery questions. For instance, use of an aid varies widely between patients (full assistance with a walker versus occasional use of a cane); however, this is a difficulty for all patient reported questionnaires as there are limitations on the number and complexity of questions a patient can be expected to answer, particularly in a standard of care setting. There was a strong association between early recovery and higher FJS-12 scores. Further validation work would be beneficial to officially validate these early recovery questions, however, it is the intention of the authors to present these data to set a baseline for future studies and to add to the growing body of literature exploring ways to better understand and study early postoperative recovery after THA.

Conclusion

Excellent patient reported early functional recovery outcomes and satisfaction were observed at 6- and 12-weeks post-op in this cohort and is the first reported data using a novel PRO. These early recovery outcomes questions associated strongly with the Forgotten Joint Score. These data could be beneficial for informing patients of potential functional recovery timelines and could be of greater interest, compared with PRO scores, in the early post-operative period.

Data availability

Data can be requested through the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) project: https://dev-yoda.pantheonsite.io/jj-available-data/.

References

  1. Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007;370(9597):1508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gazendam A, Bozzo A, Ekhtiari S, Kruse C, Hiasat N, Tushinski D, Bhandari M. Short-term outcomes vary by surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142(10):2893.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zimmerer A, Steinhaus M, Sickmuller E, Ulmar B, Hauschild M, Miehlke W, Kinkel S. Pain and rehabilitation after total hip arthroplasty are approach dependent: a multisurgeon, single-center, prospective cohort study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142(11):3075.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mead PA, Bugbee WD. Direct Anterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty improves the likelihood of return to previous recreational activities compared with posterior Approach. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev 6(1), 2022.

  5. Martusiewicz A, Delagrammaticas D, Harold RE, Bhatt S, Beal MD, Manning DW. Anterior versus posterior approach total hip arthroplasty: patient-reported and functional outcomes in the early postoperative period. Hip Int. 2020;30(6):695.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jacobs CA, Christensen CP, Berend ME. Sport activity after total hip arthroplasty: changes in surgical technique, implant design, and rehabilitation. J Sport Rehabil. 2009;18(1):47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leiss F, Gotz JS, Maderbacher G, Meyer M, Reinhard J, Zeman F, Grifka J, Greimel F. Excellent functional outcome and quality of life after primary Cementless Total hip arthroplasty (THA) using an enhanced recovery setup. J Clin Med 10(4), 2021.

  8. Leiss F, Schindler M, Gotz JS, Maderbacher G, Meyer M, Reinhard J, Zeman F, Grifka J, Greimel F. Superior functional outcome and comparable health-related quality of life after enhanced recovery vs. conventional THA: a retrospective matched pair analysis. J Clin Med 10(14), 2021.

  9. Qurashi S, Chinnappa J, Rositano P, Asha S. SuperPATH® minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty-an Australian experience. Reconstr Rev 6(2), 2016.

  10. Shibanuma N, Ishida K, Matsumoto T, Takayama K, Sanada Y, Kurosaka M, Kuroda R, Hayashi S. Early postoperative clinical recovery of robotic arm-assisted vs. image-based navigated total hip arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021;22(1):314.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Porsius JT, Mathijssen NMC, Klapwijk-Van Heijningen LCM, Van Egmond JC, Melles M, Vehmeijer SBW. Early recovery trajectories after fast-track primary total hip arthroplasty: the role of patient characteristics. Acta Orthop. 2018;89(6):597.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(4):737.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33(5):337.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS. The forgotten joint as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(3):430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Holtzman J, Saleh K, Kane R. Effect of baseline functional status and pain on outcomes of total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(11):1942.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Salmon P, Hall GM, Peerbhoy D. Influence of the emotional response to surgery on functional recovery during 6 months after hip arthroplasty. J Behav Med. 2001;24(5):489.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Johansson HR, Bergschmidt P, Skripitz R, Finze S, Bader R, Mittelmeier W. Impact of preoperative function on early postoperative outcome after total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2010;18(1):6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fortin PR, Clarke AE, Joseph L, Liang MH, Tanzer M, Ferland D, Phillips C, Partridge AJ, Belisle P, Fossel AH, Mahomed N, Sledge CB, Katz JN. Outcomes of total hip and knee replacement: preoperative functional status predicts outcomes at six months after surgery. Arthritis Rheum. 1999;42(8):1722.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ayers DC, Franklin PD, Ring DC. The role of emotional health in functional outcomes after orthopaedic surgery: extending the biopsychosocial model to orthopaedics: AOA critical issues. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(21):e165.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Goh GS, Liow MHL, Chen JY, Tay DK, Lo NN, Yeo SJ. Do patients with psychological distress have poorer patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(9):2465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Benditz A, Jansen P, Schaible J, Roll C, Grifka J, Gotz J. Psychological factors as risk factors for poor hip function after total hip arthroplasty. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2017;13:237.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Berliner JL, Brodke DJ, Chan V, SooHoo NF, Bozic KJ. John Charnley Award: preoperative patient-reported Outcome measures Predict clinically meaningful improvement in function after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sharma V, Morgan PM, Cheng EY. Factors influencing early rehabilitation after THA: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(6):1400.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Gilbey HJ, Ackland TR, Wang AW, Morton AR, Trouchet T, Tapper J. Exercise improves early functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;408:193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kennedy DM, Hanna SE, Stratford PW, Wessel J, Gollish JD. Preoperative function and gender predict pattern of functional recovery after hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(4):559.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Boersma AR, Brouwer S, Koolhaas W, Brouwer RW, Zijlstra WP, van Beveren J, Stevens M. No association between preoperative physical activity level and time to return to work in patients after total hip or knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. PLoS ONE 14(9): e0221932, 2019.

  28. Hoorntje A, Janssen KY, Bolder SBT, Koenraadt KLM, Daams JG, Blankevoort L, Kerkhoffs G, Kuijer P. The effect of total hip arthroplasty on sports and work participation: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2018;48(7):1695.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Laasik R, Lankinen P, Kivimaki M, Aalto V, Saltychev M, Makela K, Vahtera J. Return to work after primary total hip arthroplasty: a nationwide cohort study. Acta Orthop. 2019;90(3):209.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Cowie JG, Turnbull GS, Ker AM, Breusch SJ. Return to work and sports after total hip replacement. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133(5):695.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mobasheri R, Gidwani S, Rosson JW. The effect of total hip replacement on the employment status of patients under the age of 60 years. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006;88(2):131.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Nunley RM, Ruh EL, Zhang Q, Della Valle CJ, Engh CA Jr., Berend ME, Parvizi J, Clohisy JC, Barrack RL. Do patients return to work after hip arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(6 Suppl):92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Tilbury C, Leichtenberg CS, Tordoir RL, Holtslag MJ, Verdegaal SH, Kroon HM, Nelissen RG, Vliet Vlieland TP. Return to work after total hip and knee arthroplasty: results from a clinical study. Rheumatol Int. 2015;35(12):2059.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Tilbury C, Schaasberg W, Plevier JW, Fiocco M, Nelissen RG, Vliet Vlieland TP. Return to work after total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(3):512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rolfson O, Dahlberg LE, Nilsson JA, Malchau H, Garellick G. Variables determining outcome in total hip replacement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(2):157.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dayton MR, Judd DL, Hogan CA, Stevens-Lapsley JE. Performance-based Versus Self-reported outcomes using the hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score after total hip arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;95(2):132.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by DePuy Synthes. We are thankful to our colleagues Geert Meermans, MD, Jan Geurts, MD, Jan-Jaap Kats, MD, Muthukumar Thirumoolanathan, MD, Richard Zimlich, MD, Mauro Andreata, MD, Sander Koëter, MD, and Enrico de Visser, MD who were also investigators in this global, multi-center study.

Funding

This study was funded by DePuy Synthes.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DePuy Synthes, 700 Orthopaedic Drive, Warsaw, IN, USA

    David Fawley & Thierry Bernard

  2. Carolina Orthopaedic & Sports Medicine Center, 2345 Court Dr, Gastonia, NC, USA

    Henry Clayton Thomason III

  3. Hip Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy

    Luigi Zagra

  4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, 6202 AZ, The Netherlands

    René H.M. ten Broeke

  5. Orthopaedic Associates of Michigan, 555 Mid Towne St Suite 105, Grand Rapids, MI, USA

    Kory Johnson

Authors
  1. David Fawley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thierry Bernard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henry Clayton Thomason III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luigi Zagra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. René H.M. ten Broeke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kory Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

H.C.T., L.Z., R.H.M.tB., and K.J. conducted study surgeries, data acquisition, contributed to data analysis and helped draft the manuscript. D.F. contributed to study design, data analysis, prepared tables and figures, and wrote and edited the manuscript. T.B. performed the statistical analysis and reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Fawley.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

H.C.T., L.Z., R.H.M.tB., and K.J. received funding support from DePuy Synthes for this study. L.Z. is a paid consultant for DePuy Synthes, Medacta, Stryker, and 3 M. R.H.M.tB. is the President of the Dutch Hip Society. K.J. is a paid consultant for DePuy Synthes. H.C.T. is the President and board member for the Southern Orthopaedic Association. D.F. and T.B. are employees of DePuy Synthes. D.F. holds share of stock in Johnson & Johnson.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fawley, D., Bernard, T., Thomason, H.C. et al. Early functional recovery outcomes and return to work after primary total hip arthroplasty: a novel patient reported outcomes questionnaire. J Orthop Surg Res 19, 434 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04937-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04937-z

Keywords

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

ISSN: 1749-799X