EP8.29 Impact of Environmental Justice Index Score on Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes at Mid-Term Follow-Up

Clicks: 11
ID: 331075
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #95 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background There is a paucity of research investigating how SDOH, specifically the environmental domain, can affect functional outcomes after hip arthroscopy. Introduction The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of the Environmental Justice Index (EJI) score on PROMs and rates of achieving the MCID and PASS at mid-term follow-up. Methods Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for symptomatic labral tears prospectively completed PROM surveys at preoperative and at 12- and 24-month follow-ups. The study population was retrospectively divided into three categories based on EJI rank: EJIBest (highest lived environment score, 1-30th percentile), EJIAverage (average lived environment score, 31-59th percentile), and EJIWorst (lowest lived environment score, 60-100th percentile). Results 203 patients met the inclusion criteria: EJIBest (n=98, mean EJI: 18.6% ± 8.4), EJIAverage (n=85, mean EJI: 43.1% ± 7.1), and EJIWorst (n=20, mean EJI: 75.2% ± 9.9). At baseline, there were no significant differences (all P> 0.05) in PROM scores. At 12 months, EJIWorst and EJIBest reported no significant differences across all PROMs, except mHHS (P=0.031). However, EJIAverage reported significantly better outcomes than the EJIWorst cohort for mHHS, HOS ADL, NAHS, and iHOT (all P<0.05). At 24 months, no significant differences were reported among the cohorts, except for iHOT-33 between EJIAverage and EJIWorst (P=0.030). There were no significant differences in improvement across all PROMs among the cohorts across all timepoints (all P<0.05). There were also no significant differences in MCID and PASS achievement, with the exception of mHHS (P=0.036) and iHOT-33 (P=0.007) at 24 months for PASS achievement. Discussion and Conclusion Hip arthroscopy patients reported similar preoperative PROM scores regardless of EJI score. Patients in EJIWorst reported significantly worse PROMs at 12-month follow-up when compared to patients in EJIAverage; however, this difference resolved at 24-month follow-up. This suggests that the lived environment may limit the initial postoperative recovery period.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220392553 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Rishi Earla, Jackson G. Woodrow, Brandon Allen, Rachel Poutre, Srish S. Chenna, Jeffrey S. Mun, Stephen Gillinov, Bilal S. Siddiq, Adarsh Aratikatla, Solomon Williams, Scott David Martin
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.409
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.409
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.