Outcomes analysis, which has become the buzzword in orthopaedic surgery over the past ten years, is not just a new name that we've put on our old friend clinical research. What is outcomes analysis? Some clarification is provided by Johnson1, who stated: “A hallmark of the outcomes research movement is the demand for and acceptance of measures of patient perceptions, functional status, emotional health, and quality of life as indicators of the effectiveness of treatment.” A new development in medicine, such as a new medication, a new operation, or a new theory, is first met by reluctance, which is followed by overenthusiasm, which is in turn followed by rebellion. Outcomes analysis has been subjected to this sequence (often called the pendulum process) and is currently in the phase of overenthusiasm. We must keep in mind the true purpose of such studies, which is the evaluation of our management process by looking at the functional result (that is, whether the patient perceives a positive value from the management process) as opposed to the objectively measured result. A good example is the fractured femur that is solidly united with perfect length and alignment. This appears to be an excellent result when evaluated on a radiograph, but it may not be a good outcome if muscle adhesions or loss of knee-joint motion renders the limb well aligned but not very useful. Elective procedures, such as total hip replacement in adults, lend themselves beautifully …