Skills (1)
Other
-
LanguagesNorwegian, English
-
Scientific MembershipsInternational Hip Society
ISAR -
Journal RefereesActa Orthopaedica, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening, JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association
Publications (83) View all
-
Article: TRIGEN INTERTAN Intramedullary Nail Versus Sliding Hip Screw: A Prospective, Randomized Multicenter Study on Pain, Function, and Complications in 684 Patients with an Intertrochanteric or Subtrochanteric Fracture and One Year of Follow-up.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Both intramedullary nails and sliding hip screws are used with good results in the treatment of intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. The aim of our study was to assess whether use of the TRIGEN INTERTAN nail, as compared with a sliding hip screw, resulted in less postoperative pain, improved functional mobility, and reduced surgical complication rates for patients with an intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric fracture. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized multicenter study, 684 elderly patients were treated with the INTERTAN nail or with a sliding hip screw with or without a trochanteric stabilizing plate. The patients were assessed during their hospital stay and at three and twelve months postoperatively. A visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score was recorded at all time points, and functional mobility was assessed with use of the timed Up & Go test. The Harris hip score (HHS) was used to assess hip function more specifically. Quality of life was measured with the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). Radiographic findings as well as intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Patients treated with an INTERTAN nail had slightly less pain at the time of early postoperative mobilization (VAS score, 48 versus 52; p = 0.042), although this did not influence the length of the hospital stay and there was no difference at three or twelve months. Regardless of the fracture and implant type, functional mobility, hip function, patient satisfaction, and quality-of-life assessments were comparable between the groups at three and twelve months. The numbers of patients with surgical complications were similar for the two groups (twenty-nine in the sliding-hip-screw group and thirty-two in the INTERTAN group, p = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: INTERTAN nails and sliding hip screws are similar in terms of pain, function, and reoperation rates twelve months after treatment of intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instruction for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 02/2013; 95(3):200-208. · 3.27 Impact Factor -
Article: Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Functional results of reversed total prostheses (RTP) have-to a very limited degree-been compared with those of other shoulder prosthesis types. The aim of our study was to compare results of four different types of shoulder prostheses in terms of function, pain, and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Questionnaires were completed by 859 patients with shoulder prostheses registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or fracture sequela (FS) were included. Symptoms and function were assessed using the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS, scale 0-48), and the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) was used to assess QoL. RESULTS: Best functional results were obtained using conventional total prostheses (TPs) and RTPs -mean OSS improvement 18 and 16 units, respectively, vs 11 with hemiprostheses (HPs). For patients with OA, TPs performed best; for those with RA and FS, RTPs performed best; and those with HPs had the worst results in all diagnostic groups. The greatest improvement in QoL was seen in patients with TPs and RTPs. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional TPs provide the best improvement in pain, function and QoL in OA patients; RTPs are superior in patients with RA and FS.International Orthopaedics 12/2012; · 2.03 Impact Factor -
Article: Increasing risk of prosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background and purpose The risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been reported to be increasing in Norway. We investigated whether this increase is a common feature in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden). Materials and methods The study was based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) dataset. 432,168 primary THAs from 1995 to 2009 were included (Denmark: 83,853, Finland 78,106, Norway 88,455, and Sweden 181,754). Adjusted survival analyses were performed using Cox regression models with revision due to infection as the endpoint. The effect of risk factors such as the year of surgery, age, sex, diagnosis, type of prosthesis, and fixation were assessed. Results 2,778 (0.6%) of the primary THAs were revised due to infection. Compared to the period 1995-1999, the relative risk (with 95% CI) of revision due to infection was 1.1 (1.0-1.2) in 2000-2004 and 1.6 (1.4-1.7) in 2005-2009. Adjusted cumulative 5-year revision rates due to infection were 0.46% (0.42-0.50) in 1995-1999, 0.54% (0.50-0.58) in 2000-2004, and 0.71% (0.66-0.76) in 2005-2009. The entire increase in risk of revision due to infection was within 1 year of primary surgery, and most notably in the first 3 months. The risk of revision due to infection increased in all 4 countries. Risk factors for revision due to infection were male sex, hybrid fixation, cement without antibiotics, and THA performed due to inflammatory disease, hip fracture, or femoral head necrosis. None of these risk factors increased in incidence during the study period. Interpretation We found increased relative risk of revision and increased cumulative 5-year revision rates due to infection after primary THA during the period 1995-2009. No change in risk factors in the NARA dataset could explain this increase. We believe that there has been an actual increase in the incidence of prosthetic joint infections after THA.Acta Orthopaedica 10/2012; 83(5):449-58. · 2.17 Impact Factor -
Article: Good function after shoulder arthroplasty.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background and purpose Different results after shoulder arthroplasty have been found for different diagnostic groups. We evaluated function, pain, and quality of life after shoulder arthroplasty in 4 diagnostic groups. Patients and methods Patients with shoulder arthroplasties registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register from 1994 through 2008 were posted a questionnaire in 2010. 1,107 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), acute fracture (AF), or fracture sequela (FS) returned completed forms (65% response rate). The primary outcome measure was the Oxford shoulder score (OSS), which assesses symptoms and function experienced by the patient on a scale from 0 to 48. A secondary outcome measure was the EQ-5D, which assesses life quality. The patients completed a questionnaire concerning symptoms 1 month before surgery, and another concerning the month before they received the questionnaire. Results Patients with RA and OA had the best results with a mean improvement in OSS of 16 units, as opposed to 11 for FS patients. Both shoulder pain and function had improved substantially. The change in OSS for patients with AF was negative (-11), but similar end results were obtained for AF patients as for RA and OA patients. Quality of life had improved in patients with RA, OA, and FS. Interpretation Good results in terms of pain relief and improved level of function were obtained after shoulder arthroplasty for patients with RA, OA, and-to a lesser degree-FS. A shoulder arthropathy had a major effect on quality of life, and treatment with shoulder replacement substantially improved it.Acta Orthopaedica 09/2012; 83(5):467-73. · 2.17 Impact Factor -
Article: [Independent research environments are!].
Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening 01/2012; 132(1):12-3.
