Differences in outcomes of obese women and men undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of obesity on the incidence of main complications (infection, dislocation, and revision), functional outcome, and patient satisfaction 5 years after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), and to determine whether results differ between obese women and men. METHODS: We conducted a hospital-based prospective cohort study including patients who underwent primary THA (2,495 hips) between 1996 and 2005. We used rates and rate ratios to compare the incidence of main complications in obese and nonobese patients, and we stratified the data for sex. Functional outcome was measured using the Harris Hip Score and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. RESULTS: The adjusted incidence rate ratio for infection (obese versus nonobese) was 4.4 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.8, 10.8). Obesity substantially increased the infection rate in women (incidence rate ratio comparing obese with nonobese women 16.1; 95% CI 3.4, 75.7), whereas obesity appeared to have no effect in men (incidence rate ratio 1.0; 95% CI 0.2, 5.3). The adjusted incidence rate ratio for dislocation (obese versus nonobese) was 2.4 (95% CI 1.4, 4.2), with a higher rate increase in obese women. A total of 817 patients had a 5-year clinical followup visit. Functional outcome and satisfaction were slightly lower in obese women partly due to higher complication rates. No difference was seen in men. CONCLUSION: Primary THA is a successful intervention in obese patients, but physician and patient must be aware of increased complications, particularly in women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".