EP8.32 A Lack of Standardization in United States Online Rehabilitation Protocols After Open and Endoscopic Hip Abductor Tendon Repairs Exists

Clicks: 7
ID: 331117
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 #428 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 Purpose To evaluate readily accessible United States based online physical therapy protocols for open and endoscopic hip abductor tendon repairs and to assess the variability in post-operative rehabilitation protocols. Methods Online physical therapy protocols from United States based orthopaedic institutions for gluteus medius/minimus repair were collected using a web-based query utilizing search terms “hip abductor repair rehabilitation protocol” and “gluteus repair rehabilitation protocol.” Published protocols from both Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) academic orthopaedic surgery programs and private groups were collected. All publicly available protocols were included. Protocols were analyzed using a standardized spreadsheet to assess rehabilitation components and timelines. Descriptive statistics (median values, percentages, ranges) were calculated. Results 54 rehabilitation protocols were assessed, including 22 (41%) from ERAS-affiliated academic programs or associated physicians. Postoperative weight-bearing was addressed in 53/54 (98%) protocols, with 41 (77%) recommending toe-touch/touchdown/flat-foot/20-lb weightbearing. Median duration of restricted weight-bearing was 6 weeks (range, 2–8 weeks). Regarding range of motion restrictions, 37 (69%) protocols limited hip flexion to 90°, 42 (78%) advised against passive adduction past neutral, and 49 (91%) against active abduction. Bracing was recommended in 30 (56%) protocols, with 25 (83%) lacking brace specification and only 5 (17%) recommending an abduction brace. Return-to-sport timelines were included in 19 (35%) protocols, with a median 16 weeks (range 12-24). Functional testing was mentioned in 22 (41%) protocols, though tests and criteria varied. Conclusion Substantial variability exists in the composition and timing of rehabilitation protocols following hip abductor tendon repairs. A majority of protocols advised limited weight bearing for the first 6 weeks after surgery and avoidance of active hip abduction and passive hip adduction, however there was wide variation in the recommendations regarding brace use, strengthening progressions, the role of functional testing, and the timeline for return to activity and sport.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220401160 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Chukwudubem Anwunah, Samuel Rosenberg, Matthew J. Hartwell
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.412
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.412
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.