Table 5.
Change in relevant PROMs grouped by 1-year UCLA improvement. Values are mean (SD) unless otherwise specified
| UCLA improvement |
Correlation Spearman’s rho |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | ≤ –1 | 0 | 1–2 | 3–4 | ≥ 5 | |
| Hips, n (%) | 5 (4) | 22 (17) | 50 (38) | 35 (27) | 18 (14) | |
| 1-year OHS | 45 (2) | 43 (6) | 44 (5) | 44 (5) | 44 (6) | 0.09 |
| Δ OHS | 24 (5) | 20 (7) | 22 (8) | 25 (8) | 27 (9) | 0.21 |
| Δ EQ-VAS | 13 (26) | 20 (15) | 24 (27) | 33 (22) | 38 (27) | 0.29 |
| Satisfied or very | ||||||
| satisfied. n (%) | 5 (100) | 20 (91) | 49 (98) | 33 (94) | 18 (100) | 0.09 |
| Knee, n (%) | 16 (12) | 29 (22) | 44 (33) | 25 (19) | 20 (15) | – |
| 1-year OKS | 34 (10) | 38 (9) | 38 (9) | 39 (5) | 45 (4) | 0.30 |
| Δ OKS | 13 (11) | 14 (9) | 18 (8) | 19 (7) | 29 (6) | 0.44 |
| Δ EQ-VAS | 1 (26) | 16 (25) | 16 (18) | 26 (18) | 37 (26) | 0.39 |
| Satisfied or very | ||||||
| satisfied, n (%) | 9 (56) | 21 (72) | 38 (86) | 23 (92) | 20 (100) | 0.39 |
OHS/OKS: Oxford Hip/Knee Score (0–48, 48 best).
Δ (Delta): change scores from baseline to 1 year postoperatively (EQ-5D-5L results did not provide further valuable information, thus only EQ VAS results are reported). Correlations denote the non-parametrical correlation between the given parameter and UCLA change score (in “satisfaction,” all 5 levels were used in correlation analyses).