Treatment decisions after interdisciplinary evaluation for nonarthritic hip pain: A randomized controlled trial

Background: Physical therapy and hip arthroscopy are two viable treatment options for patients with nonarthritic hip pain (NAHP); however, patients may experience considerable decisional conflict when making a treatment decision. Interdisciplinary evaluation with a physical therapist and surgeon may better inform the decision-making process and reduce decisional conflict. Objective: To identify the extent to which an interdisciplinary evaluation between a surgeon, physical therapist, and patient influences treatment plans and decisional conflict of persons with NAHP. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Hip preservation clinic. Participants: Adults with primary NAHP. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive a standard (surgeon) or interdisciplinary (surgeon+physical therapist) evaluation. Surgeon evaluations included patient interview, strength and range-of-motion examination, palpation, gross motor observation, and special testing. Interdisciplinary evaluations started with the surgeon evaluation, then a physical therapist evaluated movement impairments during sitting, sit-to-stand, standing, single-leg stance, single-leg squat, and walking. All evaluations concluded with treatment planning with the respective provider(s). Outcome Measures: Treatment plan and decisional conflict were collected pre- and postevaluation. Inclusion of physical therapy in participants' postevaluation treatment plans and postevaluation decisional conflict were compared between groups using chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U tests, respectively. Results: Seventy-eight participants (39 in each group) met all eligibility criteria and were included in all analyses. Sixty-six percent of participants who received an interdisciplinary evaluation included physical therapy in their postevaluation treatment plan, compared to 48% of participants who received a standard evaluation (p =.10). Participants who received an interdisciplinary evaluation reported 6.3 points lower decisional conflict regarding their postevaluation plan (100-point scale; p =.04). The interdisciplinary and standard groups reduced decisional conflict on average 24.8 ± 18.9 and 23.6 ± 14.6 points, respectively. Conclusions: Adding a physical therapist to a surgical clinic increased interest in physical therapy treatment, but this increase was not statistically significant. The interdisciplinary group displayed lower postevaluation decisional conflict; however, both groups displayed similar reductions in decisional conflict from pre- to postevaluation. This study also demonstrated the feasibility of an interdisciplinary evaluation in a hip preservation clinic.