An interventional study of total hip replacement with single use ancillary and total hip replacement with conventional ancillary in Total Hip Replacement and Coxarthrosis, sponsored by University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand. Completed at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-07.
Sponsored by University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The main objective of the study is to compare the use of single-use ancillary reaming material during total hip replacement and conventional reusable ancillary reaming material.
The assessment will focus on the medico-economic differences found in this prospective randomized study
In orthopaedics, the ancillary equipment is a generic term that includes all the instruments necessary for hip replacement surgery. The surgeon remains very dependent on these boxes of instruments, including rasps, reamers and trial implants (stems and trial heads), which are required in THR. Each instrument set is generally packaged in 2 or 3 boxes and each surgeon has a limited number of instrument sets at his disposal per operating day. Each ancillary device has a purchase cost, a maintenance cost (paid by the laboratories or distributors) and a sterilization cost, (paid by the health care institutions).
Single-use reamers are instruments that are used on a single patient and then discarded. Performance and safety of use are optimized by providing a sterile and new product for each use.
Therefore, it seems judicious to compare the medico-economic differences between the use of single-use reamers versus reusable reamers within a classic ancillary.
This study will compare the costs incurred, the waste produced, the operating time, the satisfaction of the surgeon after the use of single-use reamers during total hip replacement, versus conventional re-sterilizable ancillary and verify the equivalence, three months after surgery, of clinical and radiological results.
628 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoarthritis, Hip; 121 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 40 is below the median of 90 across 450 interventional studies indexed under Osteoarthritis, Hip.
Browse Osteoarthritis, Hip studies →University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand is the lead sponsor of 841 studies on the registry; 178 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Total hip replacement with the use of disposable reamers
Device: total hip replacement with single use ancillary
Total hip replacement with the use of conventional reamers
Device: total hip replacement with conventional ancillary
Comparison of the use of conventional ancillary reaming and single-use ancillary reaming material in total hip replacement
Comparison of the use of conventional ancillary reaming and single-use ancillary reaming material in total hip replacement
Overall cost of surgery
Direct medical costing in both groups: * Sterilization costs, * Inventory management costs, * Material costs, * Waste management costs, * Operating room costs based on room occupancy times.
Time frame: At 3 months
Surgical time
Calculated from the beginning of the skin incision to closure and recorded on the anesthesia sheet
Time frame: intraoperative
Modified Merle d'Aubigné and Postel Method score
The patients were evaluated by the Modified Merle d'Aubigné and Postel Method, which evaluates pain, gait and mobility, on a scale of 1 to 6 for each item, where 1 indicates the worst and 6, the best state of the patient. The total minimum score reached is 3, and the maximum is 18.
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
Harris Hip Score
This instrument has 10 items in 3 sections describing pain, function, range of motion, and deformity. The first section is questionnaire-based, answered by the patient, and includes impairments and activities. The second and third sections are administered by the therapist or physician, and include leg length measurement and range of motion (ROM) measures of the hip (flexion, abduction, external rotation and adduction). Each item has a unique numerical scale that corresponds to descriptive response options. The highest possible score is 100, with a higher score indicating less dysfunction.
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
Charnley classification and Devane score
Devane score: The purpose of this score is to specify the patient's activity level preoperatively. Initially established by Devane, it allows a classification of each patient in 5 categories from sedentary to athletic Charnley score: This is a commonly used score designed to assess the patient's overall disability in relation to gait function. It was published by Charnley and distinguishes patients into 3 categories
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
WOMAC score
The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) is a widely used, proprietary set of standardized questionnaires used by health professionals to evaluate the condition of patients with osteoarthritis of hip, including five items for pain (score range 0-20), two for stiffness (score range 0-8), and 17 for functional limitation (score range 0-68).
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
HOOS score
The hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS) is a questionnaire intended to be used to assess the patient's opinion about their hip and associated problems and to evaluate symptoms and functional limitations related to the hip during a therapeutic process. To interpret the score, the outcome measure is transformed in a worst to best scale from 0 to 100, with 100 indicating no symptoms and 0 indicating extreme symptoms.
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
Pain evaluation
The visual similar scale is auto completed. For the intensity of pain, the scale varies between "no pain" (the score of 0) and "most painful" (the score of 10).
Time frame: Pré-opérative examination / At 3 months
Operator satisfaction
Operator satisfaction score (numerical scale from 0 (not satisfied) to 10 (very satisfied)) of the material during the surgical procedure
Time frame: through surgical intervention an average of 1 day
Radiological analysis
realization of standard radiographs of the pelvis from the front, hip from the front and from the side. Analysis of the acetabulum according to Charnley and search for the presence of granulometry, migration or acetabular osteolysis. Measurement of the femoral and acetabular offset and height of the center of rotation
Time frame: At 3 months
Complications
Analysis of possible intraoperative and postoperative complications and their costs: loosening, infection, dislocation, wear and implant fracture
Time frame: At 3 months
This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand