Why all newborn hip screening programs have same results—a mini review

Matias Vaajala BM,Oskari Pakarinen,Ilkka Helenius,Mikko M Uimonen,Ville T Ponkilainen,Ilari Kuitunen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-024-05539-x

2024-04-10

European Journal of Pediatrics

Abstract:All newborns are screened for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), but countries have varying screening practices. The aim of this narrative mini review is to discuss the controversies of the screening and why it seems that all screening programs are likely to have same outcome. Different screening strategies are discussed alongside with other factors influencing DDH in this review. Universal ultrasound (US) has been praised as it finds more immature hips than clinical examination, but it has not been proven to reduce the rates of late-detected DDH or surgical management. Universal US screening increases initial treatment rates, while selective US and clinical screening have similar outcomes regarding late detection rates than universal US. This can be explained by the extrinsic factor affecting the development of the hip joint after birth and thus initial screening during the early weeks cannot find these cases.

pediatrics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper aims to explore the controversies in the neonatal developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) screening programs and why various screening strategies adopted in different countries and regions seem to lead to similar results. Specifically, the paper discusses the following points:

1. **Differences in screening strategies**: There are differences in DDH screening practices among countries, mainly divided into universal ultrasound screening (Universal US), selective ultrasound screening (Selective US) and clinical examination (Clinical Examination).

2. **Consistency of screening results**: Although universal ultrasound screening can detect more immature hips, it does not significantly reduce the detection rate of late - onset DDH or the need for surgical treatment. On the contrary, universal ultrasound screening increases the initial treatment rate, and selective ultrasound screening and clinical examination are similar to universal ultrasound screening in terms of the detection rate of late - onset DDH.

3. **Influence of external factors**: The paper points out that the development of the hip joint after birth is affected by a variety of external factors, which may lead to some cases not being detected by early screening. Therefore, even if screened early, some hips may still develop into a pathological state at a later stage.

4. **Cost - benefit analysis**: Universal ultrasound screening has a high cost, but it does not show obvious advantages in terms of clinical effectiveness and economy. Therefore, the paper suggests that in areas with limited resources, universal ultrasound screening should not be widely recommended, but should be concentrated in high - risk areas.

5. **Future research directions**: The paper emphasizes that future research should focus on better identifying risk factors and formulating optimized screening guidelines for high - risk neonates.

In conclusion, through a comprehensive analysis of existing literature and data, this paper points out the limitations of current DDH screening strategies and proposes directions for improvement.