Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases logoLink to Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
. 2000 Nov;59(11):857–863. doi: 10.1136/ard.59.11.857

Health impact of pain in the hip region with and without radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis: a study of new attenders to primary care

F Birrell 1, P Croft 1, C Cooper 1, G Hosie 1, G Macfarlane 1, A Silman 1
PMCID: PMC1753020  PMID: 11053061

Abstract

OBJECTIVES—To assess the health impact of hip pain at the time of first presentation to primary care, and the influence on this of radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS—Cross sectional survey of 195 patients (63 male, 132 female), aged 40 years and over, presenting with a new episode of hip pain, recruited from 35 general practices across the UK. Health status at presentation was determined by a structured questionnaire on symptoms, healthcare use, and health related quality of life (SF-36). Pelvic radiographs were assessed blindly for hip osteoarthritis using standard scoring systems.
RESULTS—The overall impact on health was substantial. Before their first consultation, three quarters of patients needed analgesics, half used topical creams or ointments, and one in eight used a walking stick. Most of these impact measures were, however, unrelated to the degree of radiographic change, though use of a walking stick was increased in those with the most severe damage. Health status, as judged by the SF-36, was also impaired for measures of physical function and pain, but the impact on the "mental health", "general health", and "vitality" dimensions was small. There was a weak relation between the SF-36 scores and radiographic change, with many domains unrelated to the severity of radiographic damage.
CONCLUSIONS—This study is the first to show the therapeutic impact and pattern of impairment in health status resulting from hip pain at the time of first presentation to the healthcare services. Unlike many regional pain syndromes seen in primary care, such as back pain, hip pain does not impact on wider aspects of quality of life, such as general health status, mental health, or vitality. Furthermore, any impact of hip pain in this group is not markedly influenced by the degree of structural damage. Further follow up is required to determine whether such damage influences the persistence of any adverse impact.



Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (146.7 KB).

Figure 1  .

Figure 1  

Open in a new tab

Standardised drawing for hip pain.    

Figure 2  .

Figure 2  

Open in a new tab

SF-36 measures: depression of Z score compared with age and sex matched norms.

Figure 3  .

Figure 3  

Open in a new tab

SF-36 measures by radiographic grade stratified by (A) Croft grade and (B) by minimum joint space—depression of Z score.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Croft P. R., Papageorgiou A. C., Ferry S., Thomas E., Jayson M. I., Silman A. J. Psychologic distress and low back pain. Evidence from a prospective study in the general population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995 Dec 15;20(24):2731–2737. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199512150-00015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Croft P., Cooper C., Wickham C., Coggon D. Defining osteoarthritis of the hip for epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1990 Sep;132(3):514–522. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cushnaghan J., Dieppe P. Study of 500 patients with limb joint osteoarthritis. I. Analysis by age, sex, and distribution of symptomatic joint sites. Ann Rheum Dis. 1991 Jan;50(1):8–13. doi: 10.1136/ard.50.1.8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. DANIELSSON L. G. INCIDENCE AND PROGNOSIS OF COXARTHROSIS. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1964;66:SUPPL 66–7114. doi: 10.3109/ort.1964.35.suppl-66.01. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fear J., Hillman M., Chamberlain M. A., Tennant A. Prevalence of hip problems in the population aged 55 years and over: access to specialist care and future demand for hip arthroplasty. Br J Rheumatol. 1997 Jan;36(1):74–76. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/36.1.74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fox K. M., Hochberg M. C., Resnik C. S., Kenzora J. E., Hebel J. R., Zimmerman S. I., Hudson J., Magaziner J. Severity of radiographic findings in hip osteoarthritis associated with total hip arthroplasty. J Rheumatol. 1996 Apr;23(4):693–697. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Garratt A. M., Ruta D. A., Abdalla M. I., Buckingham J. K., Russell I. T. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ. 1993 May 29;306(6890):1440–1444. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6890.1440. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hadorn D. C., Holmes A. C. The New Zealand priority criteria project. Part 1: Overview. BMJ. 1997 Jan 11;314(7074):131–134. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7074.131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hubert H. B., Bloch D. A., Fries J. F. Risk factors for physical disability in an aging cohort: the NHANES I Epidemiologic Followup Study. J Rheumatol. 1993 Mar;20(3):480–488. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jensen M. P., Karoly P., Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain. 1986 Oct;27(1):117–126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jørring K. Osteoarthritis of the hip. Epidemiology and clinical role. Acta Orthop Scand. 1980 Jun;51(3):523–530. doi: 10.3109/17453678008990835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kiebzak G. M., Vain P. A., Gregory A. M., Mokris J. G., Mauerhan D. R. SF-36 general health status survey to determine patient satisfaction at short-term follow-up after total hip and knee arthroplasty. J South Orthop Assoc. 1997 Fall;6(3):169–172. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Spector T. D., Hochberg M. C. Methodological problems in the epidemiological study of osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1994 Feb;53(2):143–146. doi: 10.1136/ard.53.2.143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Stucki G., Liang M. H., Phillips C., Katz J. N. The Short Form-36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic health status measure in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res. 1995 Sep;8(3):174–181. doi: 10.1002/art.1790080310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Thomas E., Silman A. J., Croft P. R., Papageorgiou A. C., Jayson M. I., Macfarlane G. J. Predicting who develops chronic low back pain in primary care: a prospective study. BMJ. 1999 Jun 19;318(7199):1662–1667. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7199.1662. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wilcock G. K. The prevalence of osteoarthrosis of the hip requiring total hip replacement in the elderly. Int J Epidemiol. 1979 Sep;8(3):247–250. doi: 10.1093/ije/8.3.247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Williams J. I., Llewellyn Thomas H., Arshinoff R., Young N., Naylor C. D. The burden of waiting for hip and knee replacements in Ontario. Ontario Hip and Knee Replacement Project Team. J Eval Clin Pract. 1997 Feb;3(1):59–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.1997.tb00068.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES