Skip to main content
. 2006 Oct 18;2006(4):CD001708. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001708.pub2

STARS 2006.

Methods Randomisation by: computer telephone randomisation service.
Participants 11 hospitals in Scotland, UK 
 298 patients 
 Characteristics of participants: 
 Mean age: 75 years 
 Male: 66 (22%) 
 Loss to follow‐up: 2 (0.7%) 
 Inclusions: mobile, mental test score equal to or more than 7/10, aged 60 and above, no serious concomitant disease, displaced intracapsular fracture 
 Exclusions: those not satisfying the above criteria
Interventions 1. Reduction and fixation with cancellous screws or sliding hip screw 
 versus: 
 2. Cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty versus 
 3. Cemented total hip replacement (surgical approach for arthroplasty was that preferred by the surgeon)
Outcomes Follow‐up for 24 months 
 OUTCOMES COLLECTED BY TRIAL 
 (a) Operative details: length of surgery in minutes, number transfused 
 (b) Complications related to type of operation: 
 For internal fixation: fixation failure, early redisplacement, non‐union, avascular necrosis 
 For replacement arthroplasty: dislocation 
 Re‐operations 
 Wound healing: superficial infection, deep sepsis 
 (c) Postoperative complications: 
 Deep vein thrombosis 
 Pulmonary embolism 
 Cerebrovascular accident 
 Septicaemia 
 Other medical complications 
 (d) Postoperative care outcomes: none 
 (e) Anatomical restoration: none 
 (f) Final outcome measures: 
 Mortality at 4, 12, 24 months 
 Pain at 4, 12, 24 months 
 Walking score at 4, 12, 24 months 
 Function score at 4, 12, 24 months 
 EQ5D score at 4, 12, 24 months 
 (g) Economic cost: 
 estimated cost for the three trial procedures
Notes Additional information supplied by trialists
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk 'centralized fully automated computer‐based telephone service'
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk 'centralized fully automated computer‐based telephone service'
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 Were the assessors of pain and function at follow‐up blinded to the treatment allocation High risk No mention of blinding of assessors of pain and function