Prevalence and Consistency in Surgical Outcome Reporting for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purposes of this review were (1) to collate and synthesize research studies reporting any outcome measure on both open and arthroscopic surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome and (2) to report the prevalence and consistency of outcomes across the included studies. METHODS: A computer-assisted literature search of the MEDLINE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and Embase databases was conducted using keywords related to FAI syndrome and both open and arthroscopic surgical outcomes, resulting in 2,614 studies, with 163 studies involving 14,824 subjects meeting the inclusion criteria. Two authors independently reviewed study inclusion and data extraction with independent verification. The prevalence of reported outcomes was calculated and verified by separate authors. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2016, there has been a 2,600% increase in the publication of surgical outcome studies. Patients had a mean duration of symptoms of 27.7 ± 21.5 months before surgery. Arthroscopy was the surgical treatment used in 71% of studies. The mean final follow-up period after surgery was 32.2 ± 17.3 months. Follow-up time frames were reported in 78% of studies. Ten different patient-reported outcome measures were reported. The alpha angle was reported to be measured 42% less frequently as a surgical outcome than as a surgical indication. Surgical complications were addressed in only 53% of studies and failures in 69%. Labral pathology (91% of studies reporting) and chondral pathology (61%) were the primary coexisting pathologies reported. Clinical signs, as defined by the Warwick Agreement on FAI syndrome, were reported in fewer than 25% of studies. CONCLUSIONS: Most FAI syndrome patients have longstanding pain and potential coexisting pathology. Patient-reported outcome measures and diagnostic imaging are the most frequently reported outcomes. Measures of hip strength and range of motion are under-reported. It is unclear whether the inconsistency in reporting is because of lack of measurement or lack of reporting of specific outcomes in these studies. Current surgical outcomes are limited to mid-term surgical follow-up time frames and inconsistent outcome reporting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".