Appendix 2: Patient Satisfaction Statements and Rates

Author, Year / Satisfaction Statement / Satisfaction Percentage
Brewster et al., 1975[22] / Subjectively, thirty of the patients either were enthusiastic or were very satisfied with their result. / 90.90%
Cameron and Jung, 1987[29] / Generally, patients are happy with the result. Only one would not have had the procedure done had the outcome been known.
Cameron, 2005[30] / Although the patients who limped were somewhat disappointed, all of the patients indicated they did not regret undergoing the procedure.
Fernandez-Fairen et al., 2010[9] / In the study cohort, 28 patients were very satisfied, 11 were satisfied, three were uncertain, and six were unsatisfied. / 28 very satisfied (58%), 11 satisfied (23%), 3 uncertain (6%), 6 unsatisfied (12%)
Hamadouche et al., 2001[20] / Forty-one (91%) of the forty-five patients had a satisfactory functional outcome, and forty-three (96%) were pain-free with respect to the involved joint. / 91
Hardinge et al., 1986[26] / Five patients were dissatisfied with the surgery.
Howard et al., 2002[31] / in general, patients were satisfied with the outcome of surgery. In each patient the arch of motion of the hip was improved.
Joshi et al., 2002[15] / 100
Kilgus et al., 1990[32] / Twenty-nine patients (thirty-two hips) reported that they were much benefited by the procedure, and an additional four patients felt that they were substantially benefited. The most important factors contributing to satisfaction were relief of pain in the back, improved mobility of the hip, and correction of limb-length discrepancy. / 87.00%
Kim et al., 2003[33] / The high degree of satisfaction of the patients was more the result of improved mobility, relief of pain in the back and knee, and decreased discrepancy between the lengths of the limbs.
Kim et al., 2007[8] / All patients were subjectively satisfied with bilateral conversion of their arthrodesis to THA.
Peterson et al., 2009[3,36] / - / 67%
Rajaratnam et. Al, 2009[36] / All patients were satisfied with their procedure and reported sustained improvement in their post operative function following the "takedown" of their ankylosed hip.
Reikerås et al., 1995[21] / The subjective evaluations showed that 13 of the patients were very much satisfied, 19 were much satisfied, 7 were satisfied, 3 were less satisfied, and 4 were unsatisfied. / 85
Richards and Duncan, 2011[4] / Mean Satisfaction score=75.
Rutz et al., 2009[37] / All patients (100%) stated that they would undergo the operation again because hip joint function allowed more normal daily activity, especially sitting.
Schäfer et al., 2000[38] / At follow-up examination, all patients claimed that they would undergo the operation again, because joint function allowed more normal activity of daily living, especially sit- ting. / 100
Sirikonda et al., 2008[39] / At the latest follow-up, all the patients were pleased with the clinical outcome following conversion to arthroplasty. None of the patients were disappointed with the procedure. Twenty- eight patients were very pleased with the result, while the remaining 16 were satisfied with the result. / 100
Strathy and Fitzgerald, 1988[40] / In eighteen patients, the hip was rated as good or excellent; in thirteen, as fair; in nine, as poor. (Out of 40 follow up patients total)
Villanueva et al., 2013[6] / Despite the clinical results, all but two patients were completely satisfied after conversion.