Article Text

Download PDFPDF
High or low return to sport rates following hip arthroscopy is a matter of definition?
  1. Tobias Wörner1,2,
  2. Kristian Thorborg3,
  3. Anders Stålman4,
  4. Kate E Webster5,
  5. Hanna Momatz Olsson2,
  6. Frida Eek1
  1. 1 Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
  2. 2 Sophiahemmet, Capio Artro Clinic, Stockholm, Sweden
  3. 3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sports Orthopaedic Research Center—Copenhagen (SORC-C), Copenhagen University Hospital, Amager-Hvidovre, Denmark
  4. 4 Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Stockholm Sports Trauma Research Center, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  5. 5 School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Tobias Wörner, Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund SE-22100, Sweden; tobias.worner{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

A 2018 meta-analysis reports an overall return to sports (RTS) rate of 91% and high patient satisfaction following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (‘arthroscopy’ in this paper).1 Even though three in four athletes were reported to return to pre-injury levels of sports, it remains unknown if they also reach their pre-injury level of performance. Currently, RTS is frequently defined as a binary outcome (ie, either as having returned to sport or not).

This simple definition does not reflect the complexity of the dynamic RTS process; the more complex elements that constitute RTS were highlighted in the 2016 consensus statement on RTS.2 That statement recommends reporting RTS as a continuum from return to participation through return to sport and, finally, return to performance.2 This letter reports RTS rates following arthroscopy according to the continuum approach. In addition, patients’ satisfaction regarding RTS levels attained is presented. …

View Full Text


  • Contributors The study was designed by TW, FE and KT. Data collection was performed by TW, FE, AS and HMO. Data analysis was performed by TW and FE. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved of the final version.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval The study was approved by the Lund University regional ethics board (Dnr:2016/1068).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.