PubMed2003
CONTEXT: A "missed" case of congenital hip dislocation (CDH) can be a disaster for the patient and the outcome may be poor. Considerable resources are expended on screening programmes to identify appropriate cases early but a recent change in terminology to developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and a realisation that neonatal hip maturation is poorly understood has made it difficult to know who should be screened and why. STARTING POINT: Neonatal hip screening is well established although some experts feel that the effectiveness of clinical let alone ultrasound screening programmes is unproven. Several European countries undertake population screening, while selective screening occurs in 93% of UK units. K Holen and colleagues recently reported (J Bone Joint Surg 2002; 84-B: 886-90) a prospective randomised trial of just over 15 500 newborn babies in which they compare universal and selective screening programmes. With a follow-up of 6-11 years, one late-detected hip dysplasia was seen in the universal group compared with six in the selective group (not statistically significant). These investigators found, on the background of an excellent clinical programme, no additional benefit from universal screening and thus advocate selective screening. WHERE NEXT: The aims of a screening programme must be defined, then evaluated. A consideration of costs can never take into account family pain and distress. The results of the universal screening programme in Coventry, UK, are impressive and significantly better than results from other UK centres. If the Coventry results are the gold standard, then it is necessary to work out how this can be achieved elsewhere rather than worry about whether it is unachievable.
Hip Dislocation, Congenital↗