A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries
Background The aim was to review the funding, organization, data handling, outcome measurements, and findings from existing national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries; to consider the possibility of pooling data between registries; and to consider wether a pan european registry might b...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2012-10, Vol.21 (10), p.1328-1335 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1335 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1328 |
container_title | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM |
description | Background The aim was to review the funding, organization, data handling, outcome measurements, and findings from existing national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries; to consider the possibility of pooling data between registries; and to consider wether a pan european registry might be feasible. Materials and methods Web sites, annual reports, and publications from ongoing national registries were searched using Google, PubMed, and links from other registries. Representatives from each registry were contacted. Results Between 1994 and 2004, 6 shoulder registries and 5 elbow registries were established, and by the end of 2009, the shoulder registries included between 2498 and 7113 replacements and the elbow registries between 267 and 1457 replacements. The registries were initiated by orthopedic societies and funded by the government or by levies on implant manufacturers. In some countries, data reporting and patient consent are required. Completeness is assessed by comparing data with the national health authority. All registries use implant survival as the primary outcome. Some registries use patient-reported outcomes as a secondary outcome. Conclusions A registry offers many advantages; however, adequate long-term funding and completeness remain a challenge. It is unlikely that large-scale international registries can be implemented, but more countries should be encouraged to establish registries and, by adopting compatible processes, data could be pooled between national registries, adding considerably to their power and usefulness. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.004 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_536545</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1058274612001139</els_id><sourcerecordid>1040995659</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-5bb7f7cda2bfc8d7d30a670d97950713c8fc4b22edecfadb189ef511a7900e1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwA7igXJC4JMzYsRMLCakqn1IlDsDZcuwJOM3Gi52w6r_H2922EhKcPLKeZ_zxTlE8R6gRUL4e6zFRzQBZDbwGaB4Upyg4q6QAeJhrEF3F2kaeFE9SGgFANcAeFyeMSdV0HZwW787LSL897cowlLNZfJjNVKafYZ0cxdLMrqSpD7tyDH5eMrudjKUN3dQ_fFqip_S0eDSYKdGz43pWfP_w_tvFp-ryy8fPF-eXlRVMLpXo-3ZorTOsH2znWsfByBacapWAFrntBtv0jJEjOxjXY6doEIimVQCExM-K6tA37Wi79nob_cbEax2M18etq1yRFlyKRmRe_ZPfxuDupVsRmRBSig6z--rgZvDXSmnRG58sTZOZKaxJIzSglJBCZRQPqI0hpUjD3UEIeh-UHnUOSu-D0sB1Dio7L47t135D7s64TSYDL4-ASdZMQzSz9emek41AccO9OXCUPz4HGXWynmZLzkeyi3bB__cab_-y7eRnnw-8omtKY1hjnof8Wp2yo7_uJ2o_UMgAELnifwB28ccD</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1040995659</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD ; Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD ; Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD ; Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD ; Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD ; Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD ; Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD ; Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS ; Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS ; Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</creator><creatorcontrib>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD ; Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD ; Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD ; Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD ; Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD ; Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD ; Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD ; Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS ; Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS ; Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</creatorcontrib><description>Background The aim was to review the funding, organization, data handling, outcome measurements, and findings from existing national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries; to consider the possibility of pooling data between registries; and to consider wether a pan european registry might be feasible. Materials and methods Web sites, annual reports, and publications from ongoing national registries were searched using Google, PubMed, and links from other registries. Representatives from each registry were contacted. Results Between 1994 and 2004, 6 shoulder registries and 5 elbow registries were established, and by the end of 2009, the shoulder registries included between 2498 and 7113 replacements and the elbow registries between 267 and 1457 replacements. The registries were initiated by orthopedic societies and funded by the government or by levies on implant manufacturers. In some countries, data reporting and patient consent are required. Completeness is assessed by comparing data with the national health authority. All registries use implant survival as the primary outcome. Some registries use patient-reported outcomes as a secondary outcome. Conclusions A registry offers many advantages; however, adequate long-term funding and completeness remain a challenge. It is unlikely that large-scale international registries can be implemented, but more countries should be encouraged to establish registries and, by adopting compatible processes, data could be pooled between national registries, adding considerably to their power and usefulness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22694880</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>arthroplasty ; Arthroplasty, Replacement - statistics & numerical data ; Biological and medical sciences ; Diseases of the osteoarticular system ; elbow ; Elbow Joint - surgery ; Humans ; implant ; Medical sciences ; Medicin och hälsovetenskap ; Orthopedic surgery ; Orthopedics ; Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data ; outcome assessment ; prosthesis ; Registries ; Registry ; shoulder ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2012-10, Vol.21 (10), p.1328-1335</ispartof><rights>Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>2012 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2012 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-5bb7f7cda2bfc8d7d30a670d97950713c8fc4b22edecfadb189ef511a7900e1e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-5bb7f7cda2bfc8d7d30a670d97950713c8fc4b22edecfadb189ef511a7900e1e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.004$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3548,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=26451580$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22694880$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:125566581$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</creatorcontrib><title>A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>Background The aim was to review the funding, organization, data handling, outcome measurements, and findings from existing national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries; to consider the possibility of pooling data between registries; and to consider wether a pan european registry might be feasible. Materials and methods Web sites, annual reports, and publications from ongoing national registries were searched using Google, PubMed, and links from other registries. Representatives from each registry were contacted. Results Between 1994 and 2004, 6 shoulder registries and 5 elbow registries were established, and by the end of 2009, the shoulder registries included between 2498 and 7113 replacements and the elbow registries between 267 and 1457 replacements. The registries were initiated by orthopedic societies and funded by the government or by levies on implant manufacturers. In some countries, data reporting and patient consent are required. Completeness is assessed by comparing data with the national health authority. All registries use implant survival as the primary outcome. Some registries use patient-reported outcomes as a secondary outcome. Conclusions A registry offers many advantages; however, adequate long-term funding and completeness remain a challenge. It is unlikely that large-scale international registries can be implemented, but more countries should be encouraged to establish registries and, by adopting compatible processes, data could be pooled between national registries, adding considerably to their power and usefulness.</description><subject>arthroplasty</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</subject><subject>elbow</subject><subject>Elbow Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>implant</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>outcome assessment</subject><subject>prosthesis</subject><subject>Registries</subject><subject>Registry</subject><subject>shoulder</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwA7igXJC4JMzYsRMLCakqn1IlDsDZcuwJOM3Gi52w6r_H2922EhKcPLKeZ_zxTlE8R6gRUL4e6zFRzQBZDbwGaB4Upyg4q6QAeJhrEF3F2kaeFE9SGgFANcAeFyeMSdV0HZwW787LSL897cowlLNZfJjNVKafYZ0cxdLMrqSpD7tyDH5eMrudjKUN3dQ_fFqip_S0eDSYKdGz43pWfP_w_tvFp-ryy8fPF-eXlRVMLpXo-3ZorTOsH2znWsfByBacapWAFrntBtv0jJEjOxjXY6doEIimVQCExM-K6tA37Wi79nob_cbEax2M18etq1yRFlyKRmRe_ZPfxuDupVsRmRBSig6z--rgZvDXSmnRG58sTZOZKaxJIzSglJBCZRQPqI0hpUjD3UEIeh-UHnUOSu-D0sB1Dio7L47t135D7s64TSYDL4-ASdZMQzSz9emek41AccO9OXCUPz4HGXWynmZLzkeyi3bB__cab_-y7eRnnw-8omtKY1hjnof8Wp2yo7_uJ2o_UMgAELnifwB28ccD</recordid><startdate>20121001</startdate><enddate>20121001</enddate><creator>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD</creator><creator>Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS</creator><creator>Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS</creator><creator>Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20121001</creationdate><title>A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries</title><author>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD ; Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD ; Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD ; Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD ; Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD ; Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD ; Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD ; Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS ; Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS ; Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-5bb7f7cda2bfc8d7d30a670d97950713c8fc4b22edecfadb189ef511a7900e1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>arthroplasty</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</topic><topic>elbow</topic><topic>Elbow Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>implant</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicin och hälsovetenskap</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>outcome assessment</topic><topic>prosthesis</topic><topic>Registries</topic><topic>Registry</topic><topic>shoulder</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rasmussen, Jeppe V., MD</au><au>Olsen, Bo S., MD, PhD</au><au>Fevang, Bjørg-Tilde S., MD, PhD</au><au>Furnes, Ove, MD, PhD</au><au>Skytta, Eerik T., MD, PhD</au><au>Rahme, Hans, MD, PhD</au><au>Salomonsson, Björn, MD, PhD</au><au>Mohammed, Khalid D., MB, ChB, FRACS</au><au>Page, Richard S., BMedSci, FRACS</au><au>Carr, Andrew J., MD, ChM</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2012-10-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1328</spage><epage>1335</epage><pages>1328-1335</pages><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>Background The aim was to review the funding, organization, data handling, outcome measurements, and findings from existing national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries; to consider the possibility of pooling data between registries; and to consider wether a pan european registry might be feasible. Materials and methods Web sites, annual reports, and publications from ongoing national registries were searched using Google, PubMed, and links from other registries. Representatives from each registry were contacted. Results Between 1994 and 2004, 6 shoulder registries and 5 elbow registries were established, and by the end of 2009, the shoulder registries included between 2498 and 7113 replacements and the elbow registries between 267 and 1457 replacements. The registries were initiated by orthopedic societies and funded by the government or by levies on implant manufacturers. In some countries, data reporting and patient consent are required. Completeness is assessed by comparing data with the national health authority. All registries use implant survival as the primary outcome. Some registries use patient-reported outcomes as a secondary outcome. Conclusions A registry offers many advantages; however, adequate long-term funding and completeness remain a challenge. It is unlikely that large-scale international registries can be implemented, but more countries should be encouraged to establish registries and, by adopting compatible processes, data could be pooled between national registries, adding considerably to their power and usefulness.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>22694880</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.004</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1058-2746 |
ispartof | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2012-10, Vol.21 (10), p.1328-1335 |
issn | 1058-2746 1532-6500 1532-6500 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_536545 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings; MEDLINE |
subjects | arthroplasty Arthroplasty, Replacement - statistics & numerical data Biological and medical sciences Diseases of the osteoarticular system elbow Elbow Joint - surgery Humans implant Medical sciences Medicin och hälsovetenskap Orthopedic surgery Orthopedics Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data outcome assessment prosthesis Registries Registry shoulder Shoulder Joint - surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases |
title | A review of national shoulder and elbow joint replacement registries |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T14%3A28%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20review%20of%20national%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20joint%20replacement%20registries&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Rasmussen,%20Jeppe%20V.,%20MD&rft.date=2012-10-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1328&rft.epage=1335&rft.pages=1328-1335&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E1040995659%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1040995659&rft_id=info:pmid/22694880&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1058274612001139&rfr_iscdi=true |