Comparison 3. Internal fixation versus Total Hip Replacement.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Length of surgery (in minutes)	2		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	Totals not selected
1.1 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
1.2 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2 Operative blood loss (in millilitres)	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	Totals not selected
2.1 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3 Number of patients transfused	2	240	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.32 [0.20, 0.50]
3.1 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.07 [0.02, 0.22]
3.2 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	138	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.74 [0.43, 1.26]
4 Re‐operations minor (Fixation removal of metalwork, dislocation of THR)	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
4.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.19 [0.01, 3.80]
4.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.52 [0.23, 1.14]
4.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	9.25 [1.23, 69.60]
4.4 SHS versus Howse II	1	180	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.03 [0.00, 0.43]
5 Re‐operations moderate (Fixation to hemiarthroplasty or THR, drainage, girdlestone)	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
5.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	14.4 [0.87, 238.56]
5.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	27.16 [3.66, 201.50]
5.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	34.26 [2.12, 553.64]
5.4 SHS versus Howse II	1	180	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	59.67 [3.70, 961.20]
6 Re‐operations major (revision THR)	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
6.1 Hannson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.32 [0.01, 7.48]
6.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.19 [0.01, 3.76]
6.4 SHS versus Howse II	1	180	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.08 [0.00, 1.32]
7 Total re‐operation rate (within follow‐up period of study)	7		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
7.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	3.35 [0.78, 14.50]
7.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or Bimetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.32 [1.36, 3.94]
7.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	11.56 [2.89, 46.25]
7.4 SHS versus Howse II	1	180	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.47 [0.90, 2.38]
7.5 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	138	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	4.5 [1.98, 10.21]
7.6 SHS versus THR (unknown type)	1	86	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	12.0 [1.63, 88.29]
8 Superficial wound infection	4	315	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.43 [0.13, 1.50]
8.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.32 [0.01, 7.48]
8.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.66 [0.14, 3.15]
8.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.19 [0.01, 3.76]
9 Deep wound infection	3		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
9.1 SHS versus Howse II	1	178	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.16 [0.01, 3.36]
9.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	1	146	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.62 [0.11, 63.28]
9.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
10 Hospital stay (days)	2		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	Totals not selected
10.1 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
10.2 SHS versus THR (unknown type)	1		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
11 Mortality up to 2 to 4 months	4	406	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.21 [0.91, 5.40]
11.1 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	2.03 [0.65, 6.29]
11.2 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	6.48 [0.34, 122.37]
11.3 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	138	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.5 [0.26, 8.70]
12 Mortality at 12 to 18 months	4	390	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.03 [0.64, 1.64]
12.1 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	2	166	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.99 [0.55, 1.76]
12.2 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	138	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.5 [0.44, 5.08]
12.3 SHS versus THR (unknown type)	1	86	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.83 [0.27, 2.53]
13 Mortality at 24 months	4	433	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.18 [0.79, 1.75]
13.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	47	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.64 [0.12, 3.48]
13.2 2 Olmed screws versus Lubinus or BiMetric	1	146	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.00 [0.61, 1.66]
13.3 2 Olmed screws verus Exeter THR	1	102	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.85 [0.68, 5.03]
13.4 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	138	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.5 [0.56, 3.99]
14 Mortality at 4 years	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Totals not selected
14.1 SHS versus THR (unknown type)	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
15 Pain at 1 year	2	157	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.40 [1.02, 1.90]
15.1 Hansson pin versus Charnley	1	35	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.91 [0.80, 4.55]
15.2 Screws or SHS versus THR (various)	1	122	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.31 [0.94, 1.82]