In this paper, we critically evaluate the quality of epidemiological evidence on hip osteoarthritis and workload published so far. The influence of study quality on risk estimations was analyzed in sensitivity meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses. Comprehensive searches for epidemiological studies of hip osteoarthritis and occupational workload were performed in literature databases and current reviews. All studies were assessed on the basis of study design, defined quality scores, and relevant confounders considered. In total, 34 suitable studies were identified for critical evaluation. Of these, 20 are prevalence studies and 14 incidence studies. Strong heterogeneity is observed in study design, quality level, and estimated exposure parameters. A consistent positive association between heavy physical workload and hip osteoarthritis was observed only among the male populations, not among the female populations. In general, cohort studies provided lower effect estimates than cross-sectional and population-based case-control studies. Studies with high quality scores also produced lower effect estimates than studies with low quality scores. Consideration of BMI as a confounder in published studies also yielded lower effect estimates than studies without consideration of BMI as a confounder. Our analyses indicate that high-quality studies of the association between occupational workload and hip osteoarthritis provide lower effect estimates than studies of lower quality.
Keywords: coxarthrosis; meta-analysis; meta-regression analysis; occupational risk; osteoarthritis of the hip; study quality; workload.