Background:Adolescents presenting with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia (AD) complain of pain and reduced participation in activities of daily living (ADLs). Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is widely accepted as the preferred treatment for AD. Understanding the patient experience can lead to improvements in psychosocial and physical burden in adolescents. We sought to explore the experiences and expectations of adolescent females with AD who underwent a PAO. Methods:We conducted semistructured interviews with adolescent females who underwent a PAO >6 months ago. Questions focused on exploring their experiences with AD and their PAO expectations and decision-making. Participants also completed a 7-item Likert-scale questionnaire related to factors they considered in their decision-making, which was followed by a ranking of those considerations. We utilized an inductive and deductive coding approach to identify key themes from interviews and descriptively analyzed questionnaire responses. Results:Eighteen adolescent females between 13 and 19 years (17.2 +/- 1.9 y) at the time of PAO participated in the study. Time from surgery to interview ranged from 203 to 1534 days (927.7 +/- 320.8 d). Key themes included (1) prolonged time from symptom onset to PAO, with many seeing several providers; (2) major preoperative apprehensions of surgical outcome and setbacks in school and recreational activities; (3) discussion with the physician and people who underwent PAO were the most beneficial sources of information; (4) Postoperative worries include surgical outcome and return to daily living. Eighty-nine percent of participants reported that return to daily activities and sustaining long-term hip health were very important factors in their PAO decision-making, and 61% ranked their return to daily activities as their top priority. Conclusions:Adolescent females with AD report frustrating delays in diagnosis and appropriate intervention and value their return to daily living in their decision to undergo PAO. The development of future patient-centered interventions may improve the PAO decision-making process and should include information related to surgical recovery and anecdotes of others who underwent this procedure. Level of Evidence:Level IV, therapeutic study.

Background:The purpose of this study was to (1) evaluate preoperative pelvic tilt utilizing the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle on standing pelvic x-rays, and (2) determine if the SFP angle changes after a unilateral or bilateral PAO.Methods:A retrospective review was conducted of PAOs performed by a single hip preservation surgeon from November 2018 to November 2023. Standing x-rays were reviewed at 4 time points: preoperative, subacute postoperative, 6-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up. Data collected included demographics, lateral center-edge angle (LCEA), T & ouml;nnis angle, and sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle (a surrogate metric for pelvic tilt). Linear mixed models and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to evaluate preoperative to postoperative differences in pelvic tilt for the unilateral and bilateral PAO groups, respectively.Results:Seventy-four patients met inclusion criteria, consisting of 53 unilateral and 21 bilateral PAO patients (18.5 +/- 4.1 vs. 21.3 +/- 5.1 y, 90.6% vs. 95.2% female, LCEA 17.5 deg +/- 6.5 deg vs. 18.0 deg +/- 5.5 deg and 18.0 deg +/- 6.3 deg, respectively). The Average preoperative pelvic tilt, calculated from the SFP angle, for the unilateral and bilateral PAO patients were 9.1 degrees +/- 5.5 degrees and 8.1 degrees +/- 5.6 degrees, respectively. These values increased postoperatively at average 7-week (-0.3 deg +/- 3.4 deg and 1.3 deg +/- 3.7 deg), 6-month (1.1 deg +/- 3.8 deg and 2.7 deg +/- 3.4 deg), and 12-month (1.0 deg +/- 4.1 deg and 2.7 deg +/- 3.0 deg) follow-up. Significant differences in pelvic tilt were observed from preoperative x-rays to 6 months (P=0.002) and 12 months (P=0.001) for the bilateral PAO patients, whereas the unilateral group demonstrated similar pelvic tilt at all time points (P=0.09).Conclusion:Patients undergoing bilateral PAO demonstrated an average increase in pelvic tilt of 2.7 degrees as measured by SFP angle at 6 months and 12 months postoperatively, suggesting a compensatory adaptation after surgery that may have implications in rehabilitation regimens and planned surgical corrections.Level of Evidence:Level III-therapeutic study.

Background A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in the English language for various lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. Twenty different PROMs were recommended for 15 specific musculoskeletal lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. However, the availability of cross-culturally adapted versions of these recommended PROMs is unknown. Purpose The purpose of this study was to identify the cross-culturally adapted versions of recommended PROMs for individuals experiencing orthopedic lower extremity pathologies or undergoing surgeries, and to identify the psychometric evidence that supports their utilization. Study design Literature Review Methods PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for cross-culturally adapted translated studies through May 2022. The search strategy included the names of the 20 recommended PROMs from previous umbrella review along with the following terms: reliability, validity, responsiveness, psychometric properties and cross-cultural adaptation. Studies that presented a non-English language version of the PROM with evidence in at least one psychometric property to support its use were included. Two authors independently evaluated the studies for inclusion and independently extracted data. Results Nineteen PROMS had cross-culturally adapted and translated language versions. The KOOS, WOMAC, ACL-RSL, FAAM, ATRS, HOOS, OHS, MOXFQ and OKS were available in over 10 different language versions. Turkish, Dutch, German, Chinese and French were the most common languages, with each language having more than 10 PROMs with psychometric properties supporting their use. The WOMAC and KOOS were both available in 10 languages and had all three psychometric properties of reliability, validity, and responsiveness supporting their use. Conclusion Nineteen of the 20 recommended instruments were available in multiple languages. The PROM most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated were the KOOS and WOMAC. PROMs were most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated into Turkish. International researchers and clinicians may use this information to more consistently implement PROMs with the most appropriate psychometric evidence available to support their use. Level of evidence 3a

ABSTRACT The 2022 International Society of Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) was intended to present a physiotherapy consensus on the assessment and surgical and non-surgical physiotherapy management of patients with GTPS. The panel consisted of 15 physiotherapists and eight orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, there is a lack of high-quality literature supporting non-operative and operative physiotherapy management. Therefore, a group of physiotherapists who specialize in the treatment of non-arthritic hip pathology created this consensus statement regarding physiotherapy management of GTPS. The consensus was conducted using a modified Delphi technique to guide physiotherapy-related decisions according to the current knowledge and expertise regarding the following: (i) evaluation of GTPS, (ii) non-surgical physiotherapy management, (iii) use of corticosteroids and orthobiologics and (iv) surgical indications and post-operative physiotherapy management.

# Background Non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain, caused by various pathologies, leads to impairments in range of motion, strength, balance, and neuromuscular control. Although functional performance tests offer valuable insights in evaluating these patients, no clear consensus exists regarding the optimal tests for this patient population. # Purpose This study aimed to establish expert consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests in individuals presenting with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. # Study Design A modified Delphi technique was used with fourteen physical therapy experts, all members of the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA). The panelists participated in three rounds of questions and related discussions to reach full consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests. # Results The panel agreed that functional performance tests should be utilized at initial evaluation, re-evaluations, and discharge, as well as criterion for assessing readiness for returning to sports. Tests should be as part of a multimodal assessment of neuromuscular control, strength, range of motion, and balance, applied in a graded fashion depending on the patient's characteristics. Clinicians should select functional performance tests with objective scoring criteria and prioritize the use of tests with supporting psychometric evidence. A list of recommended functional performance tests with varying intensity levels is provided. Low-intensity functional performance tests encompass controlled speed in a single plane with no impact. Medium-intensity functional performance tests involve controlled speed in multiple planes with low impact. High-intensity functional performance tests include higher speeds in multiple planes with higher impact and agility requirements. Sport-specific movement tests should mimic the patient's particular activity or sport. # Conclusion This international consensus statement provides recommendations for clinicians regarding selection and utilization of functional performance tests for those with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. These recommendations will encourage greater consistency and standardization among clinicians during a physical therapy assessment.

Background A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed for specific lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. However, a consensus as to which PROMs are recommended for use in evaluating treatment outcomes for patients with hip, knee, ankle and/or foot pathology based on the strength of their psychometric properties is lacking. Objective To identify PROMs that are recommended in systematic reviews (SRs) for those with orthopaedic hip, knee, foot, and ankle pathologies or surgeries and identify if these PROMs are used in the literature. Study design Umbrella Review Methods PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for SRs through May 2022. A second search was done to count the use of PROMs in seven representative journals from January 2011 through May 2022. SRs that recommended the use of PROMs based on their psychometric properties were included in the first search. SRs or PROMs not available in the English were excluded. The second search included clinical research articles that utilized a PROM. Case reports, reviews, and basic science articles were excluded. Results Nineteen SRs recommended 20 PROMs for 15 lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies or surgeries. These results identified consistency between recommended PROMs and utilization in clinical research for only two of the 15 lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. This included the use of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score to assess outcomes (HAGOS) for those with knee osteoarthritis and groin pain, respectively. Conclusion A discrepancy was found between the PROMs that were recommended by SRs and those used to assess clinical outcomes in published research. The results of this study will help to produce more uniformity with the use of PROMs that have the most appropriate psychometric properties when the reporting treatment outcomes for those with extremity pathologies. Level of evidence 3a

# Background Acetabular dysplasia (AD) is defined as a structurally deficient acetabulum and is a well-recognized cause of hip pain in young adults. While treatment of severe AD with a periacetabular osteotomy has demonstrated good long-term outcomes, a trial of non-operative management is often recommended in this population. This may be especially true in patients with milder deformities. Currently, there is a paucity of research pertaining to non-operative management of individuals with AD. # Purpose To present expert-driven non-operative rehabilitation guidelines for use in individuals with AD. # Study Design Delphi study # Methods A panel of 15 physiotherapists from North America who were identified as experts in non-operative rehabilitation of individuals with AD by a high-volume hip preservation surgeon participated in this Delphi study. Panelists were presented with 16 questions regarding evaluation and treatment principles of individuals with AD. A three-step Delphi method was utilized to establish consensus on non-operative rehabilitation principles for individuals presenting with AD. # Results Total (100%) participation was achieved for all three survey rounds. Consensus, defined a piori as > 75%, was reached for 16/16 questions regarding evaluation principles, activity modifications, appropriate therapeutic exercise progression, return to activity/sport criteria, and indications for physician referral. # Conclusion This North American based Delphi study presents expert-based consensus on non-operative rehabilitation principles for use in individuals with AD. Establishing guidelines for non-operative management in this population will help reduce practice variation and is the first step in stratifying individuals who would benefit from non-operative management. Future research should focus on patient-reported outcomes and rate of subsequent surgical intervention to determine the success of the guidelines reported in this study. # Level of Evidence Level V

The Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy (AOPT), formerly the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA), has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). This is an update to the 2014 Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for Hip Pain and Movement Dysfunction Associated with Nonarthritic Hip Joint Pain. The goals of the revision were to provide a concise summary of the contemporary evidence since publication of the original guideline and to develop new recommendations or revise previously published recommendations to support evidence-based practice. This current CPG covers pathoanatomical features, clinical course, prognosis, diagnosis, examination, and physical therapy interventions in the management of nonarthritic hip joint pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):CPG1-CPG70. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0302.

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) refers to pain in the lateral hip and thigh and can encompass multiple diagnoses including external snapping hip (coxa saltans), also known as proximal iliotibial band syndrome, trochanteric bursitis, and gluteus medius (GMed) or gluteus minimus (GMin) tendinopathy or tearing. GTPS presents clinicians with a similar diagnostic challenge as non-specific low back pain with special tests being unable to identify the specific pathoanatomical structure involved and do little to guide the clinician in prescription of treatment interventions. Like the low back, the development of GTPS has been linked to faulty mechanics during functional activities, mainly the loss of pelvic control in the frontal place secondary to hip abductor weakness or pain with hip abductor activation. Therefore, an impairment-based treatment classification system. is recommended in the setting of GTPS in order to better tailor conservative treatment interventions and improve functional outcomes. Level of Evidence Level V, clinical commentary

BACKGROUND:Previous studies have demonstrated a clinically impactful change in patients between 1 and 2 years after hip arthroscopy. Assessment of differences in patient-specific factors between patients who remain the same and those who change (ie, either improve or decline) could provide valuable outcome information for orthopaedic surgeons treating those patients. PURPOSE:To identify patients who experienced change in functional status between 1 and 2 years after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and assess differences in patient-specific factors between those who improved, remained the same, or declined in functional status. STUDY DESIGN:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS:Prospectively collected data for patients who underwent hip arthroscopy at 1 of 7 centers were analyzed retrospectively at 1 year and 2 years postoperatively. Patients were categorized as "improved,""remained the same," or "declined" between 1- and 2-year follow-up based on the 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) minimal clinically important difference (MCID) value. A 1-way analysis of variance was used to assess differences in iHOT-12 scores, age, body mass index (BMI), alpha angle, and center-edge angle (CEA) between groups. Chi-square analyses were used to assess differences in the proportions of male and female patients in the outcome groups. RESULTS:The study included 753 patients (515 women and 238 men), whose mean ± SD age was 34.7 ± 12 years. Average 1-year (±1 month) and 2-year (±2 months) iHOT-12 scores for all patients were 73.7 and 74.9, respectively. Based on the calculated MCID of ±11.5 points, 162 (21.5%) patients improved, 451 (59.9%) remained the same, and 140 (18.6%) declined in status between 1- and 2-year follow-up. Those who improved between 1 and 2 years had lower 1-year iHOT-12 scores (P < .0005). We found no difference in age, BMI, alpha angle, CEA, or sex between groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION:Between 1- and 2-year follow-up assessments, 21.5% of patients improved and 18.6% declined in self-reported functional status. Those with iHOT-12 scores indicating abnormal function at 1 year improved beyond the MCID at 2 years follow-up. Thus, any decisions about the failure or success of arthroscopic hip procedures should not be made until at least the 2-year follow-up. Failing to thrive at 1-year follow-up may not accurately predict outcomes at year 2 or beyond. This could potentially decrease the perceived need for revision surgery in patients who do not thrive before 2-year follow-up.

Background Treatment of acetabular dysplasia with a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) has been shown to improve long term outcomes and is considered the gold standard in the setting of symptomatic hip dysplasia in patients younger than 35 years of age. Post-operative rehabilitation following a PAO plays an important role in helping patients return to their prior level of function and reduce the impact of strength deficits that may persist. Currently, there is a paucity of research supporting post-operative rehabilitation guidelines. The purpose of this study is to present expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines to reduce practice variation following a PAO. Methods A panel of 16 physiotherapists from across the United States and Canada who were identified as experts in PAO rehabilitation by high-volume hip preservation surgeons participated in this Delphi study. Panelists were presented with 11 questions pertaining to rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Three iterative survey rounds were presented to the panelists based on responses to these questions. This three-step Delphi method was utilized to establish consensus on post-operative rehabilitation guidelines following a PAO. Results Total (100%) participation was achieved for all three survey rounds. Consensus (>75%) was reached for 11/11 questions pertaining to the following areas: 1) weight-bearing and range of motion (ROM) precautions, 2) therapeutic exercise prescription including neuromuscular control, cardiovascular exercise, and flexibility, and 3) objective measures for return to straight line running and return to full participation in sports. Conclusion This Delphi study established expert-driven rehabilitation guidelines for use following a PAO. The standardization of rehabilitative care following PAO is essential for achieving optimal outcomes despite other factors such as geographical location and socioeconomic status. Further research on patient-reported outcomes is necessary to confirm successful rehabilitation following the guidelines outlined in this study.

Bone morphology has been increasingly recognized as a significant variable in the evaluation of non-arthritic hip pain in young adults. Increased availability and use of multidetector CT in this patient population has contributed to better characterization of the osseous structures compared to traditional radiographs. Femoral and acetabular version, sites of impingement, acetabular coverage, femoral head-neck morphology, and other structural abnormalities are increasingly identified with the use of CT scan. In this review, a standard CT imaging technique and protocol is discussed, along with a systematic approach for evaluating pelvic CT imaging in patients with non-arthritic hip pain.

The association between hip and spine abnormalities is frequent, and limitation in hip extension has been linked with low back pain. The purpose of this study was to assess the radiographic osseous findings in nonarthritic hips of patients with hip pain, low back pain, and limited hip extension. Ninety patients (92 hips) were included in this study. Hip extension was tested in the contralateral decubitus position with the hip in neutral abduction/adduction and neutral rotation. In sequence, hip extension was tested by adding passive abduction, followed by internal/external rotation of the hip. A hip extension limitation was defined as less than zero degrees of extension. Imaging studies were assessed for the following osseous morphologies: decreased ischiofemoral space (≤17 mm), increased femoral torsion (≥30°), decreased femoral torsion (≤5°), and posterior acetabular overcoverage. Fifty-seven out of 92 hips (62%) had at least one osseous imaging finding for limitation in hip extension: decreased ischiofemoral space (38/92, 41%), increased femoral torsion (5/92, 5%), decreased femoral torsion (24/92, 26%), and posterior acetabular overcoverage (21/92, 23%). Decreased ischiofemoral space, femoral torsional abnormalities, and/or posterior acetabular wall overcoverage are observed in imaging studies of most individuals with limitation of hip extension and low back pain.

Shoulder and elbow injuries in overhead athletes, especially baseball pitchers, have become more common and result in limited participation. Upper extremity injuries in baseball can occur secondary to high velocity repetitive loading at extreme ranges of motion causing microtrauma to the musculoskeletal structures. With the vast number of youth and young adult baseball players in the United States and the increasing number of throwing related injuries, it is crucial that clinicians can perform a movement system evaluation of the throwing motion. An adequate evaluation of the movement system as it relates to the throwing motion can provide insight into abnormal throwing mechanics and provide rationale for selecting appropriate interventions to address identified impairments that may lead to injury. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to present a recommended movement system evaluation that can be utilized during both pre-season and in-season to assess for modifiable injury risk factors in youth and young adult baseball players. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:5.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are widely used after hip arthroscopy to track postoperative outcomes. With the number of hip arthroscopies performed each year continuing to rise in the United States, it is important to understand which specific PROM is appropriate for use in clinical practice. Clinically important outcome values (CIOVs), including minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit values, must be determined to allow for score interpretation. Many of the commonly used PROM in hip arthroscopy have CIOVs supporting their use for hip arthroscopy. The selection of an appropriate PROM allows for useful score interpretation at a single time point, as well as changes in score over time, while avoiding response burden to the patient. While the question of "Which PROM should I use?" remains unclear, CIOVs values have been established for the Nonarthritic Hip Score, modified Harris hip score, Hip Outcome Score, and International Hip Outcome Tool. We believe the advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) may outweigh those of the legacy instruments, but future research will be needed to psychometrically prove this!

Despite the harrowing opioid crisis in the United States, the use of opioids to combat musculoskeletal pain continues to be widespread. In the setting of hip arthroscopy, approximately one-third of patients are on opioids while awaiting surgery to address the pain that results from femoracetabular impingement syndrome. In addition, the use of opioids to address pain postoperatively is common practice. With the rapid rise of hip arthroscopy in the United States, it is paramount that other modes of pain relief are promoted by surgeons in conjunction with allied health professionals, such as physical therapists. In fact, early physical therapy has been shown to decrease the use of postoperative opioids by 10%. The use of complementary and alternative therapies should be common practice in the in the orthopaedic setting to assist in reducing the number of opioids used for both pre and postoperative pain management. While this may be a small piece of the opioid crisis puzzle, it is up to all of us in the medical community to do our part and change the direction of the current opioid crisis.

BACKGROUND:Defining success in hip arthroscopy through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is complicated by the wide range of available questionnaires and overwhelming amount of information on how to interpret scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) are collectively known as clinically important outcome values (CIOVs). These CIOVs provide benchmarks for meaningful improvement. The aims of this review were to update the evidence regarding joint-specific PROMs used for hip arthroscopy and to collate available CIOVs in this population. METHODS:A systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed to identify studies reporting measurement properties of PROMs utilized for hip arthroscopy. Metrics of reliability, validity, and responsiveness were extracted and graded according to an international Delphi study. Questionnaire interpretability was evaluated through CIOVs. RESULTS:Twenty-six studies were reviewed. One study validated a novel questionnaire, 3 studies validated existing questionnaires, and 22 studies reported CIOVs. The most evidence supporting interpretability was found for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS, 11 studies), modified Harris hip score (mHHS, 10 studies), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12, 9 studies). Scores indicative of the smallest perceptible versus substantial clinically relevant changes were reported for the iHOT-12 (12 to 15 versus 22 to 28), iHOT-33 (10 to 12 versus 25 to 26), HOS-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL, 9 to 10 versus 10 to 16), HOS-Sports (14 to 15 versus 25 to 30), and mHHS (7 to 13 versus 20 to 23). Absolute postoperative scores indicative of an unsatisfactory versus a desirable outcome were reported for the iHOT-12 (below 56 to 63 versus above 86 to 88), iHOT-33 (below 58 versus above 64 to 82), HOS-ADL (below 87 to 92 versus above 94), HOS-Sports (below 72 to 80 versus above 78 to 86), and mHHS (below 74 to 85 versus above 83 to 95). CONCLUSIONS:Six questionnaires had reported clinically important outcome thresholds, with the HOS, mHHS, and iHOT-12 having the most information to support score interpretation. Thresholds for the HOS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and iHOT-33 describe desirable absolute PROM scores and minimum and substantial change scores within 5 years following hip arthroscopy. Despite substantial heterogeneity in calculation methodology, included cohorts, and follow-up time, available interpretability values could be meaningfully summarized. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:In light of increasing use of PROMs in orthopaedics, a summary of the available CIOVs provides guidance for clinicians in mapping numerical scores from PROMs onto clinical benchmarks.

Groin pain syndromes, commonly referred to as sports hernias, are pathologic conditions which are not commonly well understood by those treating athletes despite making up approximately 6% of athletic injuries. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive understanding and consistent nomenclature for appropriate identification and treatment of this relatively common condition. A computerized database search was conducted up to June 2019 and pertinent articles were cited using the terms sports hernia, athletic pubalgia, and groin pain. The quality and validity of the evidence was assessed based on journal prestige and impact factor as well as consistency with the other reviewed literature. The reviewed literature was inconsistent in terms of terminology. Few comprehensive reviews exist combining intra- and extra-articular causes of groin pain syndromes in athletes. Further, little orthopedic literature exists regarding pathologic inguinal and abdominal wall conditions. Groin pain syndromes refers to inguinal pain where the pathology is not caused by disturbances in the intra-articular hip joint, however, concomitant pathology in both locations are common. It is thought to be associated with a number of factors, including imbalances in abdominal and hip adductor strength, deficits in hip range of motion, poor tissue extensibility, and high intensity or high repetition hip adductor muscle shearing. The history and physical exam remain central to the appropriate diagnosis. Diagnostic imaging modalities such as MRI, CT, and diagnostic ultrasound are recommended due to difficulty of diagnosis based on physical exam alone. Non-operative treatment should first be attempted with surgical intervention yielding good outcomes in those that require it.

Fractures, dislocations, muscle and tendon strains, athletic pubalgia, contusions, and femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) are common injuries in American football players and range in severity from minor to major due to the high energy collisions, but have not been comprehensively reviewed. Athletes with preexisting FAI are more prone to hip subluxation and dislocation as well as intra-articular pathology. Although stress fractures are the most common osseous issues, femoral neck and pelvis fractures have the risk for high amounts of morbidity. Musculotendinous injury and contusions are the most common injuries in football with goals of return to play being based in maintaining motion and progression to strengthening. American football hip injuries are unique and can be quite severe due to high energy collisions. Prompt and appropriate management is key to prevent long term morbidity and shorten safe return to play.