三种髋关节功能评定方法的比较研究  

Comparative study of three different hip function e-valuation systems

作　　者：戴戎[1] 董凡[1] 王以友 唐坚[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海第二医科大学附属第九人民医院骨科

出　　处：《中华外科杂志》1994年第9期535-538,共4页Chinese Journal of Surgery

摘　　要：作者采用Ｈａｒｒｉｓ、Ｃｈａｒｎｌｅｙ和北京髋关节功能评定标准，对同一组４２例行双极型人工股骨头置换术的患者进行了功能评定，并将三种评定标准的评定结果进行了统计学比较。结果提示三种评定标准具有可比性。在对一组患者的髋关节功能作总体评价之前，应先按Ｃｈａｒｎｌｅｙ方法根据患者原有行走能力分为三类，三类评分不宜混淆。北京方案计算总分的方法可能需作一定改进。文内根据分析结果，对三种评分法的优缺点、日常活动能力评定和放射学评定的重要性进行了讨论。AbstractHarris’s, Charnley’s and Beijing's numerical rat-ing systems were used to evaluate the functional resultsof 42 cases of bipolar type artificial femoral head re-placement. The resuIts of assessment of the threemethods were compared statistically and proved thatthe resuIts are comparable, Before the overall evaluation, the patients should be divided into three groups(according to Charnley' s method)on the basis of theiroriginal capacity of locomotion, The score results ofthe three groups should not be mixed up. The calcula-tion method of total score of Beijing system may needcertain modification. The advantages and disadvantagesof the three systems, the significance of capacity assessment of daily activity and radiological evaluationare discussedon the basis of the resuIts of analvsis.

关 键 词：髋关节 人工关节 参考标准 

分 类 号：R318.17[医药卫生—生物医学工程]