Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the costs, effects, and cost-utility of an accelerated physiotherapy programme versus a standard physiotherapy programme following resurfacing hip arthroplasty. DESIGN: A cost-utility analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A UK National Health Service hospital and patients' homes. SUBJECTS: A total of 80 male resurfacing hip arthroplasty patients randomized post procedure to one of the two programmes. INTERVENTIONS: The accelerated physiotherapy programme commenced in hospital with patients being fully weight bearing, without hip precautions, and following a range of exercises facilitating gait re-education, balance, and lower limb strength. Standard physiotherapy commenced in hospital, but hip precautions were used and exercises were only partially weight bearing. In both groups, patients continued with their exercises at home for an eight-week period. MAIN MEASURES: Data on healthcare contacts were collected from patients to 12 months and costed using unit costs from national sources. Information was also collected on patients' costs. Health-related quality of life was measured using the EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaire and used to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to 12 months. Mean costs and QALYs for each trial arm were compared. RESULTS: On average, the accelerated physiotherapy programme was less expensive (mean cost difference -£200; 95% confidence interval: -£656 to £255) and more effective (mean QALY difference 0.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.21) than standard physiotherapy and had a high probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: From the National Health Service perspective, an accelerated physiotherapy programme for male patients undergoing revision of total hip arthroplasty (RHA) is very likely to be cost-effective when compared to a standard physiotherapy programme.

Original publication




Journal article


Clin rehabil

Publication Date





1003 - 1014


Cost-utility, hip arthroplasty, physiotherapy, randomized controlled trial, rehabilitation, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Gait, Humans, Lower Extremity, Male, Middle Aged, Muscle Strength, Physical Therapy Modalities, Postoperative Care, Postural Balance, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, United Kingdom