Athletes experience a high rate of return to sport following hip arthroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the rate at which patients return to sport following arthroscopic hip surgery. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched by two reviewers, and titles, abstracts, and full-text articles screened in duplicate. English language studies investigating hip arthroscopy with reported return to sport outcomes were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was used to combine the rate of return to sports using a random effects model. RESULTS: Overall, 38 studies with 1773 patients (72% male), with a mean age of 27.6 years (range 11-65) and mean follow-up of 28.1 months (range 3-144) were included in this review. The pooled rate of return to sport was: 93% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 87-97%] at any level of participation; 82% (95% CI = 74-88%) at preoperative level of sporting activity; 89% (95% CI = 84-93%) for competitive athletes; 95% (95% CI = 89-98%) in pediatric patients; and 94% (95% CI 89.2-98.0%) in professional athletes. There was significant correlation between a shorter duration of preoperative symptoms and a higher rate of return to sports (Pearson correlation coefficient = - 0.711, p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopy yields a high rate of return to sport, in addition to marked improvement in pain and function in the majority of patients. The highest rates of return to sport were noted in pediatric patients, professional athletes, and those with a shorter duration of preoperative symptoms. This study provides clinicians with evidence-based data on athletes' abilities to return to sport after arthroscopic hip surgery and identifies sub-populations with the highest rates of return to sport. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review of Level II-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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".