摘要
目的分析、比较全髋关节置换术后Harris和Charnley评分标准。方法回顾性研究2008年1月至2009年3月接受全髋关节置换术患者43例(45髋);男22例(22髋),女21例(23髋);年龄29～72岁,平均(52.7±14.1)岁。分别使用Harris[1]和Charnley[2]评分标准进行术后评估并分析、比较。所得数据输入SPSS11.0统计软件包,计数资料采用χ2检验。结果术后3个月所有患者两种评估方法均无差出现。Harris和Charnley评分为优者分别为33例(73.33%)和26例(63.41%),差异有统计学意义(χ2=8.915,P<0.05);评分为良者分别为10例(22.22%)和12例(24.39%),差异无统计学意义(χ2=2.642,P>0.05);评分为中者分别为2例(4.45%)和3例(7.32%),差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.068,P>0.05)。术后12个月所有患者两种评估方法均无差出现。Harris和Charnley评分为优者分别为35例(77.78%)和31例(75.61%),差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.458,P>0.05);评分为良者分别为9例(20.00%)和9例(21.95%),差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.527,P>0.05);评分为中者分别为1例(2.22%)和1例(2.44%),差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.713,P>0.01)。结论两种方法在评估结果上基本一致,但也表现出各自特点,Charnley评分确实方便简单,能大致反映具体情况,等差的评分易于记忆使用。Harris评分中得分的不等差,反映所评项目的轻重差异,表达更清楚,但必须使用图表记录。
Objective To compare the difference between Charnley scores and Harris scores in evaluating total hip arthroplasty.Methods From January 2008 to March 2009,43 patients（45 hips）underwent total hip arthroplasty.There were 22 males（22 hips）and 21 females（23 hips）,with an average age of 52.7±14.1 years（ranged from 29 to 72 years）.Harris score and Charnley score were used for postoperative assessment.The data were input in SPSS11.0 software package for statistical analysis.Results There was no difference between the two assessment methods three months postoperatively.33 cases（73.33%）in Harris and 26 cases（63.41%）in Charnley score were taken as excellent ones,and there was statistical differences between them（χ2=8.915,P〈0.05）.10 cases（22.22%）in Harris and 12 cases（24.39%）in Charnley score were taken as good ones,but there was no statistical differences between them（χ2=2.642,P〈0.05）.There was also no difference between the two assessment methods 12 months postoperatively.35 cases（77.78%）in Harris score and 31 cases（75.61%）in Charnley score were taken as excellent ones（χ2=1.458,P〈0.05）;9 cases（20.00%）in Harris score and 9 cases（21.95%）in Charnley score were taken as good ones（χ2=1.527,P〉0.05）;only one in Harris score and Charnley score were taken as moderate ones（χ2=0.713,P0.01）.Conclusion The assessment result of Harris score is similar to that of Charnley score,but they demonstrate their respective characteristics.Charnley scoring is simple,and can generally reflect the specific situation,and easily be remembered.Harris scores ranging from poor score can reflect the severity of the item under assessment differences,and the expression is more clear,but must use charts records.
出处
《中国骨与关节外科》
2011年第6期450-454,共5页
Chinese Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
