Background: The aim of this study was to investigate differences in functional recovery eight years after total hip arthroplasty in patients who underwent hip joint surgery using two different approaches: the classic lateral approach and the anterolateral minimally invasive surgical approach. Methods: Eight years after the hip replacement, 68 subjects, 32 in the classic and 36 in the minimally invasive group, underwent follow-up measurements involving the Harris Hip Score (HHS), range of motion, strength of the abductor muscles, 50-m walk time, body mass index (BMI), physical activity questionnaire, and visual analogue scale (VAS) pain during general activities. Results: Higher HHS (p < 0.001), hip abduction (p < 0.001), and hip flexion (p = 0.018) range of motion values were obtained in the minimally invasive approach group. A correlation between physical activity (PA) and the hip abduction muscle strength in the classic group (r = 0.43; p = 0.011) and a correlation between PA and the HHS in the minimally invasive group (r = 0.34, p = 0.041) was found. BMI was correlated with the 50-m walk time in both groups (classical: r = 0.39; p = 0.027; minimally invasive r = 0.35; p = 0.030); meanwhile, in the minimally invasive group, BMI was negatively correlated with hip flexion (r = −0.37; p = 0.020). Conclusions: Eight years after total hip arthroplasty, performed using either an anterolateral minimally invasive or lateral approach, there was no difference in the patients’ functional outcome in relation to BMI. The minimally invasive approach benefits patients by granting them better functional abilities. A clinical difference was found in the HHS, in favour of the minimally invasive group.

Background/Objectives: Distal radius fractures are common upper extremity injuries requiring reliable outcome measures for accurate clinical assessment. This study aimed to validate the Croatian versions of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and Mayo Wrist Score (MWS) in patients with distal radius fractures. Methods: DASH, PRWE, and MWS Croatian versions were evaluated in 128 patients using standardized translation, cultural adaptation, factor analysis, and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α). Results: PRWE-Cro and DASH-Cro demonstrated excellent validity and internal consistency (α > 0.95). QuickDASH-Cro showed high reliability and is recommended as a practical alternative. MWS was validated for the first time, showing good validity and acceptable internal consistency (α = 0.71). Conclusions: PRWE-Cro and DASH-Cro are validated, reliable instruments suitable for both clinical practice and research in Croatian-speaking populations while MWS can be used as a quick screening tool.