Dataset Information

The natural history of greater trochanteric pain syndrome: an 11-year follow-up study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is a musculoskeletal condition which can cause disability and reduce quality of life. However, limited evidence is available on the long-term outcomes of people with GTPS. Our aims were to determine the long-term prevalence of GTPS; to calculate the proportion of people with GTPS who had developed hip osteoarthritis (OA); and to determine the level of function and quality of life, 11-years after initial GTPS diagnosis.

Methods

A prospective 11-year natural history study. Two groups [GTPS group (n = 24), asymptomatic control (ASC) group (n = 20)] were evaluated at baseline, 12-months and 11-years. At 11-years all participants completed the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Assessment of Quality-of-Life questionnaire. At 11-year follow-up 20/24 GTPS and 19/20 ASC participants were clinically assessed for GTPS and hip OA, completed the 10 metre-walk-test, timed up and go, and hip abduction and external rotation strength testing.

Results

At 11-year follow-up 45.0% of GTPS participants had GTPS compared to 5.3% of ASC participants (p = 0.008), OR [95% CI]: 10.19 [1.95, 104.3], and 35.0% of GTPS participants were clinically diagnosed with hip OA compared to none of the ASC participants (p = 0.002), OR [95% CI]: 21.6, [2.3, 2898.0]. GTPS participants reported more pain and disability than ASC participants via the ODI, mean difference [95% CI]: 6.1 [0.7, 11.6] but not the modified Harris Hip Score, mean difference [95% CI]: -3.3 [-10.3, 3.7]. Both groups had similar levels of quality of life and measures of function.

Conclusions

GTPS is a chronic condition: people with GTPS at baseline had twice the odds of being clinically diagnosed with GTPS or hip OA than the control group at 11-years. Further, there appears to be a temporal relationship between GTPS and the development of hip OA. This finding highlights the need to identify effective treatments that address the underlying impairments associated with GTPS. Pain and function results varied depending on the assessment tools used. Between group differences in quality of life seen at baseline are not found at the 11-year follow-up. The small sample size means the results must be considered with caution.

Level of evidence

Level II Natural history Study.

SUBMITTER: Bicket L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8691027 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGreater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) possesses a harmful influence on quality of life. Numerous conservative management modalities with varying success have been proposed for patients with GTPS. However, it is not clear which treatment is more effective for reducing pain. The purpose of this Bayesian analysis was to assess the current evidence for the effectiveness of conservative treatments on improving Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scoring of GTPS and to determine the most effective treatment protocol.MethodsA comprehensive study search was performed from inception until July 18, 2022, via the electronic databases PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for potential research. The risk of bias assessment for the included studies was independently performed based on the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Bayesian analysis was conducted by using ADDIS software (v1.16.5). The DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to perform the traditional pairwise meta-analysis.ResultsEight full-text articles with a total of 596 patients with GTPS were included in the analysis. In comparing ultrasound-guided platelet-rich plasma application (PRP-U) to ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection (CSI-U), patients who received PRP therapy experienced reduced pain as the VAS decreased significantly (MD, -5.21; 95% CI, -6.24 to -3.64). VAS score in group of extracorporeal shockwave treatment (ESWT) was significant improved than that in exercise (EX) group (MD, -3.17; 95% CI, -4.13 to -2.15). There were no statistically significantly different VAS scores between the CSI-U group and the CSI under landmark (CSI-B) group. The treatment efficacy rankings of the different treatments on improving VAS scores showed that the most likely efficacious treatment was PRP-U (99%) followed by ESWT (81%), CIS-U (58%), usual care (48%), CIS-B (54%), and EX (84%).ConclusionBayesian analysis revealed that PRP injection and ESWT are relatively safe and effective in the treatment of GTPS. More multicenter high-quality randomized clinical trials with large sample sizes are still needed in the future to provide further evidence.