Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Developmental dysplasia of the hip in preterm breech infants
  1. Deeparaj Hegde1,
  2. Neil Powers2,
  3. Elizabeth A Nathan3,
  4. Abhijeet Anant Rakshasbhuvankar1
  1. 1 Neonatal Clinical Care Unit, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia
  2. 2 Department of Radiology, Perth Children's Hospital, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
  3. 3 Medical Statistics, Women and Infants Research Foundation, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Abhijeet Anant Rakshasbhuvankar, King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women, Perth, Subiaco, WA 6008, Australia; abhijeet.rakshasbhuvankar{at}


Background Whether preterm infants born with breech presentation are at similar risk of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) as the term breech infants is not known. The information will be vital for DDH screening guidelines.

Methods A retrospective audit of infants born in the breech position was performed to compare the incidence of DDH in the following gestational age groups: 23–27, 28–31, 32–36 and ≥37 weeks.

Results A total of 1144 neonates were included in the study. The incidence of DDH did not differ between the groups (11.6%, 9.4%, 13.6% and 11.5%, in 23–27, 28–31, 32–36 and ≥37 weeks, respectively, p=0.40). Sixty infants required intervention for DDH. Multiple logistic regression after correcting for potential confounders showed that gestational age group did not influence the risk of DDH, and requirement of therapy.

Conclusion Preterm infants born with breech presentation appear to have a similar incidence of DDH to term breech infants. 

  • developmental dysplasia of the hip
  • DDH
  • breech
  • preterm

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors AAR conceptualised and designed the study, supervised data collection, and contributed to the analysis, interpretation, and first and final draft of the manuscript. DH designed the data collection instruments, collected the data, and contributed to the concept, interpretation, and the first and final draft of the manuscript. EAN contributed to the design, performed the statistical analysis and contributed to the interpretation and the final draft of the manuscript. NP contributed to the concept, design, interpretation and the final draft of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval The study was approved by the King Edward Memorial Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (quality activity number 16218).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.