Global Discrepancies in the Diagnosis, Surgical Management, and Investigation of Femoroacetabular Impingement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the global pattern of surgical management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), particularly in diagnosis, outcome measurement, and management. METHODS: We performed a systematic search in duplicate for surgical studies addressing FAI published up to June 2013. Study parameters, including sample size, study location, surgical intervention technique, diagnostic imaging, outcome measures used, sex distribution, and level of evidence, were obtained. The number of trials and cumulative sample size were analyzed. The surgical interventions, sex distribution, outcome measures, and diagnostic imaging used were compared between geographic regions. RESULTS: We identified 105 studies reporting surgical interventions for FAI. Most studies were completed in North America (52 studies, 3,629 patients) and in Europe (44 studies, 3,745 patients). Asia (3 studies, 49 patients) and Oceania (6 studies, 394 patients) had smaller contributions. There were no studies from South America or Africa. Most research performed in North America, Europe, and Oceania investigated arthroscopic FAI surgery (55% of studies) followed by surgical dislocation (33%), and miniopen (15%) and combined approaches (8%). Methods of diagnosis were consistent worldwide, with radiography being the mainstay of diagnosis (84% of studies). Case series were the most common type of study globally (75% of studies). Outcome measures varied by region; Harris hip scores were most common in North America, Oceania, and Asia, whereas Non-Arthritic Hip Scores and Western Ontario McMaster scores predominated in Europe. CONCLUSIONS: Global surgical trends for FAI show a predominance of North American and European studies, studies of lower level evidence, and inconsistent use of outcome measures. However, patterns of diagnostic imaging, sex proportions, and predominance of arthroscopic techniques are consistent worldwide. Future research should focus on development of reliable validated outcome measures and international collaboration to conduct high-quality research and improve our understanding of FAI diagnosis and management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".