Utilization of ultrasonography to detect developmental dysplasia of the hip: when reality turns selective screening into universal use

A comparison of different selective ultrasound screening strategies for developmental dysplasia of the hip

To analyze whether the addition of risk-based criteria to clinical examination-based selective ultrasound screening would increase the rates of early detected cases of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and decrease the rate of late detected cases. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. The initial search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases in November 2021. The following search terms were used: (hip) AND (ultrasound) AND (luxation or dysplasia) AND (newborn or neonate or congenital). A total of 25 studies were included. In 19 studies, newborns were selected for ultrasound based on both risk factors and clinical examination. In six studies, newborns were selected for ultrasound based on only clinical examination. We did not find evidence indicating that there are differences in the incidence of early- and late-detected DDH, or in the incidence of nonoperatively treated DDH between the risk-based and clinical examination-based groups. The pooled incidence of operatively treated DDH was slightly lower in the risk-based group (0.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3 to 0.7)) compared with the clinical examination group (0.9 per 1,000 newborns, (95% CI 0.7 to 1.0)). The use of risk factors in conjunction with clinical examination in the selective ultrasound screening of DDH might lead to fewer operatively treated cases of DDH. However, more studies are needed before stronger conclusions can be drawn.

Children's Hip Predictive (CHiP) Score: A Triage Tool for Hip Dislocation in Children Referred With Suspected Hip Dysplasia

BACKGROUND

A fundamental tenent of treating developmental dysplasia of the hip is to identify patients with dislocated hips early so as to avoid the long-term sequelae of late diagnosis. The aim of this study was to develop a readily useable triage tool for patients with suspected hip dislocation, based on the clinical history and examination findings of the referring practitioner.

METHODS

All primary care referrals (n=934) over a 3-year period for suspected developmental dysplasia of the hip to a tertiary pediatric center were evaluated. Defined parameters with respect to history and clinical examination were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to establish predictors of hip dislocation, and from this a predictive model was derived which incorporated significant predictors of dislocation. An illustrative nomogram translated this predictive model into a usable numerical scoring system called the Children's Hip Prediction score, which estimates probability of hip dislocation.

RESULTS

There were 97 dislocated hips in 85 patients. The final predictive model included age, sex, family history, breech, gait concerns, decreased abduction, leg length discrepancy, and medical/neurological syndrome. The area under receiver operating curve for the model is 0.761. A Children's Hip Prediction score of≥5 corresponds to a sensitivity of 76.3% and a score of≥15 has a specificity of 97.8%, corresponding to an odds ratio of 27.3 for increased risk of dislocation.

CONCLUSION

We found that a novel clinical prediction score, based on readily available history and examination parameters strongly predicted risk of dislocations in hip dysplasia referral. It is hoped that this tool could be utilized to optimize resource allocation and may be of particular benefit in less well-resourced health care systems.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Incidence of Neonatal Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip and Late Detection Rates Based on Screening Strategy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Universal ultrasonographic screening for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) has gained increasing popularity despite the lack of benefit in terms of reducing the rates of late-detected cases (age ≥12 weeks) in randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To report the reported incidence of DDH in the English scientific literature and compare rates of late-detected cases in settings with different DDH screening strategies.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched on November 25 and 27, 2021. No time filters were used in the search.

STUDY SELECTION

All observational studies reporting the incidence of early-detected or late-detected (age ≥12 weeks) DDH were included. Non-English reports were excluded if the abstract did not include enough information to be included for analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The number of newborns screened and the detection rates were extracted. Meta-analysis calculated the pooled incidence of DDH per 1000 newborns with 95% CIs using a random- or fixed-effects model. This study is reported according to the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome measures were early detection, early treatment, late detection, and operative treatment incidences.

RESULTS

A total of 1899 studies were identified, 203 full texts were assessed, and 76 studies with 16 901 079 infants were included in final analyses. The early detection rate was 8.4 (95% CI, 4.8-14.8) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with clinical screening, 4.4 (95% CI, 2.4-8.0) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with selective ultrasonographic screening, and 23.0 (95% CI, 15.7-33.4) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with universal ultrasonographic screening. Rates for nonoperative treatment were 5.5 (95% CI, 2.1-14) treatments per 1000 newborns with clinical screening, 3.1 (95% CI, 2.0-4.8) treatments per 1000 newborns with selective ultrasonographic screening, and 9.8 (95% CI, 6.7-14.4) treatments per 1000 newborns with universal ultrasonographic screening. The incidence of late-detected DDH was 0.5 (95% CI, 0.2-1.5) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with clinical screening, 0.6 (95% CI, 0.3-1.3) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with selective ultrasonographic screening, and 0.2 (95% CI, 0.0-0.8) infants with DDH per 1000 newborns with universal ultrasonographic screening. The corresponding incidences of operative treatment were 0.2 (95% CI, 0.0-0.9) operations per 1000 newborns with clinical screening, 0.5 (95% CI, 0.4-0.7) operations per 1000 newborns with selective ultrasonographic screening, and 0.4 (95% CI, 0.2-0.7) operations per 1000 newborns with universal ultrasonographic screening.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This meta-analysis found that early detection rates and nonoperative treatments were higher with universal screening. The late detection and operative treatment rates with universal screening were similar to those among selectively and clinically screened newborns. Based on these results, universal screening may cause initial overtreatment without reducing the rates of late detection and operative treatment.

Developmental hip dysplasia and hip ultrasound frequency in a large American payer database

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is an important contributor to musculoskeletal morbidity, but effective strategies to screen for DDH remain controversial. The current utilization of hip ultrasound (US) screening for DDH in the United States is not defined. This study utilized Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart, a large commercial and Medicare Advantage claims database. The frequency of DDH and hip US utilization was estimated using billing data on an average of 2.9 million relevant beneficiaries included annually from 2007 through 2017. A total of 6806 DDH cases were identified with an average annual prevalence of 1.7 per 1000 infants, which was stable during the study period. Girls were more likely to be screened and diagnosed with DDH, comprising 72% of DDH cases with an OR of 2.55 (95% CI 2.42-2.69), p < 0.001. Hip US screening was employed in 0.9% of the infant population on average but increased substantially from 2007 (0.4%) to 2017 (2.2%). Most common billing diagnoses included hip deformity (27.4%), breech delivery (20.4%), and physical exam abnormality (17.7%). The average imaging costs per patient for all screened children was $108.94. Insurance claims reflect the current American practice of selective hip US with relative adherence to American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines based on reported diagnoses. While hip US utilization increased during the study period, prevalence of DDH diagnoses did not increase. Our results suggest that expansion of hip US screening may not effectively increase DDH detection although further investigation is needed to ascertain optimal screening strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography Method of Graf in the detection of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to perform a meta-analysis on the performance of Graf's ultrasonography method in the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

METHODS

A query was conducted on electronic bibliographic databases until the end of October 2020. The inclusion criteria entailed: 1. the use of Graf method in less than 12 weeks of age, 2. the use of follow-up as reference test, and 3. provision of crude data. Pooled diagnostic performance measures were calculated. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) checklist was utilized to assess the quality of the included studies. The hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HROC) curves were also drawn.

RESULTS

Six articles (including seven populations, 11,012 patients) were considered eligible. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were obtained at 93% (95% CI: 0.57-0.99) and 97% (95% CI:0.86-0.99), respectively (area under curve= 0.99). The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratio, as well as diagnostic odds ratio, was reported as 28.4, 0.07, and 396, respectively.

CONCLUSION

As evidenced by the obtained results, Graf's method is a useful ultrasonography technique with acceptable accuracy for screening DDH in neonates. However, there are uncertainties about the best population and age for screening. Furthermore, more attention should be paid to the proper training of this method to reduce the number of operator errors.