Table 1

Orthopedic surgeons’ profiles and opinions on the use of intra-articular steroid hip injection (IASHI)

Survey questionGroup of surgeons by years of experience; no. (and %) of surgeons
< 5 yr
n = 11
5–10 yr
n = 24
> 10 yr
n = 64
Total
n = 99
1. Annual volume of patients with hip arthritis
 < 101 (9.1)1 (4.2)02 (2.0)
 11–202 (18.2)2 (8.3)04 (4.0)
 > 208(72.7)21 (87.5)64 (100.0)93 (93.9)
2. Annual number of IASHIs ordered (open-ended question)
 02(18.2)3 (12.5)12 (18.8)17 (17.2)
 1–55 (45.5)10 (41.7)33 (51.6)48 (48.5)
 6–103 (27.3)4 (16.7)9 (14.1)16 (16.2)
 > 1006 (25.0)8 (12.5)14 (14.1)
*Did not specify1 (9.1)1 (4.2)2 (3.1)4 (4.0)
3. Do you believe IASHI to be a useful tool in your practice?
 Yes8 (72.7)14 (58.3)34 (53.1)56 (55.6)
 No3 (27.3)10 (41.7)29 (45.3)42 (42.4)
4. Would it be a great loss if IASHI was no longer available?
 Yes9 (81.8)11 (45.8)19 (29.7)39 (39.4)
 No2 (18.2)11 (45.8)41 (64.1)54 (54.5)
*Did not answer02 (8.3)4 (6.3)6 (6.1)
5. IASHI is useful, and would be no great loss0/84/14 (28.6)13/34 (38.2)17/56 (30.4)
6. Do you think IASHI is an underused procedure?
 Yes3 (27.3)2 (8.3)20 (31.3)25 (25.3)
 No6 (54.5)17 (70.8)32 (50.0)55 (55.6)
*Did not answer2 (18.2)5 (20.8)12 (18.8)19 (19.2)
7. If “yes” (underused), why? (open-ended question)
 Resource availability (fluoroscopy, radiologist)3/31/24/20 (20.0)8/25 (32.0)
 Difficult joint to inject (less accessible)0/30/24/20 (20.0)4/25 (16.0)
 Risk of infection0/30/23/20 (15.0)3/25 (12.0)
 Patient’s condition too far advanced when seen0/30/22/20 (10.0)2/25 (8.0)
 More of a diagnostic test0/30/21/20 (5.0)1/25 (4.0)
*Did not specify any reasons0/31/26/20 (30.0)7/25 (28.0)
  • * For each question, if the nonresponse rate was greater than 5%, then the nonresponse rate is listed as a separate row.