Viewing Study NCT01616667


Ignite Creation Date: 2025-12-25 @ 12:27 AM
Ignite Modification Date: 2025-12-25 @ 10:33 PM
Study NCT ID: NCT01616667
Status: COMPLETED
Last Update Posted: 2015-06-04
First Post: 2012-05-30
Is NOT Gene Therapy: False
Has Adverse Events: False

Brief Title: Comparing the Clinical Effects of Posterior Approach Versus Lateral Approach in Osteoarthritis Patients With a THA
Sponsor: Odense University Hospital
Organization:

Study Overview

Official Title: Posterior Approach Versus Lateral Approach in Osteoarthritis Patients, With Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty. The Effect on Early Physical Function, Pain, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Gait and Muscle Weakness A Randomized Clinical Trial
Status: COMPLETED
Status Verified Date: 2015-06
Last Known Status: None
Delayed Posting: No
If Stopped, Why?: Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access: False
If Expanded Access, NCT#: N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status: N/A
Acronym: COMPALA
Brief Summary: The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical outcome of the two different, but widely used, surgical approaches (Posterior approach and Lateral approach) of primary total hip arthroplasty in patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis. This study is divided into one main study and two sub-studies. The main study investigates the patient-reported outcome measures (questionnaire) within the first year post surgery. The two sub-studies investigate; i) the level of physical function and pain within the first 3 month after surgery, and ii) investigate the potential difference the two approaches have on gait-patterns and maximal isometric hip-muscle-strength, within the first year after surgery. Both approaches are described with potential drawbacks. Posterior approach has a higher risk of dislocation of the prostheses and revision due to dislocation compared with Lateral approach. Contrary, Lateral approach is described with the potential drawbacks of pain, lower physical function, gait abnormalities and muscle weakness, leading to less satisfied patients. However, according to a Cochrane analysis from 2004 concludes, more investigation is needed to determine the extent of differences.
Detailed Description: None

Study Oversight

Has Oversight DMC: False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?: None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?: None
Is an Unapproved Device?: None
Is a PPSD?: None
Is a US Export?: None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?:

Secondary ID Infos

Secondary ID Type Domain Link View
A2116 Signe Rosenlund OTHER The Danish Rheumatism Association View
11/28589 OTHER Region of Southern Denmark View