Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,662

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States

Bozic, Kevin J, Kurtz, Steven M, Lau, Edmund, Ong, Kevin, Vail, Thomas P, Berry, Daniel J·2009·The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Understanding the causes of failure and the types of revision total hip arthroplasty performed is essential for guiding research, implant design, clinical decision-making, and health-care policy. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the mechanisms of failure and the types of revision total hip arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States with use of newly implemented ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) diagnosis and procedure codes related specifically to revision total hip arthroplasty in a large, nationally representative population. METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to analyze clinical, demographic, and economic data from 51,345 revision total hip arthroplasty procedures performed between October 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006. The prevalence of revision procedures was calculated for population subgroups in the United States that were stratified according to age, sex, diagnosis, census region, primary payer class, and type of hospital. The cause of failure, the average length of stay, and total charges were also determined for each type of revision arthroplasty procedure. RESULTS: The most common type of revision total hip arthroplasty procedure performed was all-component revision (41.1%), and the most common causes of revision were instability/dislocation (22.5%), mechanical loosening (19.7%), and infection (14.8%). Revision total hip arthroplasty procedures were most commonly performed in large, urban, nonteaching hospitals for Medicare patients seventy-five to eighty-four years of age. The average length of hospital stay for all types of revision arthroplasties was 6.2 days, and the average total charges were $54,553. However, the average length of stay, average charges, and procedure frequencies varied considerably according to census region, hospital type, and type of revision total hip arthroplasty procedure performed. CONCLUSIONS: Hip instability and mechanical loosening are the most common indications for revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. As further experience is gained with the new diagnosis and procedure codes specifically related to revision total hip arthroplasty, this information will be valuable in directing future research, implant design, and clinical decision-making.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2106/jbjs.h.00155

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,662

Metadata

Authors
Bozic, K. J., Kurtz, S. M., Lau, E., Ong, K., Vail, T. P., & Berry, D. J.
Venue
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume
Published
2009-01
Volume
91
Issue
1
Pages
128-133
ISSN
0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171119558
Cited by
1,662
References
0
FWCI
51.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/jbjs.h.00155
The paper
Bozic, K. J., Kurtz, S. M., Lau, E., Ong, K., Vail, T. P., & Berry, D. J. (2009). The Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.h.00155

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.