Hip arthroplasty is being performed in ever-younger patients, for whom return to work is a major issue. Type of job, type of implant and comorbidities all affect outcome. Heavy manual work is harder to resume after hip replacement, and reclassification or cessation of activity may ensue. This, however, is little dealt with in the literature, although its consequences are both psychologically and financially critical. The aim of the present study was to perform a retrospective analysis of return to work after hip resurfacing (HR).

A retrospective study included patients undergoing Birmingham Hip Resurfacing with at least 6 months’ follow-up. Occupational status was assessed, preoperatively and at follow up, as not working, in work or retired, type of work as sedentary, manual, or strenuous, and time to return to work was noted. Clinical assessment, preoperatively and at follow-up, used Postel Merle d’Aubigné, Harris, Devane, UCLA and Oxford scores.

One hundred and seventeen patients were included (114 male, 3 female) for 121 HRs. Mean age was 52.9 years (range, 29–66 years). Mean follow-up was 14.3 months (range, 6–20 months), with no loss to follow-up. Crutches were abandoned in week 3 on average (range, 1–7 weeks). Four patients had no occupation; analysis focused on the other 113. At follow-up, only one patient had not resumed work, and was reclassified. The other 112 (99.1% of those in work) returned to their previous job at a mean 9.4 weeks (range, 1–22 weeks). Nine patients required therapeutic part-time work for a mean 5.3 weeks (range, 3–8 weeks). Time to return to work was significantly shorter for “sedentary” workers than “physical” (manual/strenuous) workers: 6.4 weeks (range, 1–9 weeks) versus 13.5 weeks (range, 2–22 weeks).

Return to work was feasible for almost all these young patients after HR. Sedentary work was resumed very quickly (<7 weeks), while strenuous work required 3 months’ sick leave.

IV.