Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorde Steiger, RN
dc.contributor.authorMiller, LN
dc.contributor.authorDavidson, DC
dc.contributor.authorRyan, P
dc.contributor.authorGraves, SE
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-21T03:11:46Z
dc.date.available2020-12-21T03:11:46Z
dc.date.issued2013-08
dc.identifier.citationde Steiger, R. N., Miller, L. N., Davidson, D. C., Ryan, P. & Graves, S. E. (2013). Joint registry approach for identification of outlier prostheses.. Acta Orthop, 84 (4), pp.348-352. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.831320.
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/257107
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Joint Replacement Registries play a significant role in monitoring arthroplasty outcomes by publishing data on survivorship of individual prostheses or combinations of prostheses. The difference in outcomes can be device- or non-device-related, and these factors can be analyzed separately. Although registry data indicate that most prostheses have similar outcomes, some have a higher than anticipated rate of revision when compared to all other prostheses in their class. This report outlines how the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) has developed a method to report prostheses with a higher than expected rate of revision. These are referred to as "outlier" prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Since 2004, the AOANJRR has developed a standardized process for identifying outliers. This is based on a 3-stage process consisting of an automated algorithm, an extensive analysis of individual prostheses or combinations by registry staff, and finally a meeting involving a panel from the Australian Orthopaedic Association Arthroplasty Society. Outlier prostheses are listed in the Annual Report as (1) identified but no longer used in Australia, (2) those that have been re-identified and that are still used, and (3) those that are being identified for the first time. RESULTS: 78 prostheses or prosthesis combinations have been identified as being outliers using this approach (AOANJRR 2011 Annual Report). In addition, 5 conventional hip prostheses were initially identified, but after further analysis no longer met the defined criteria. 1 resurfacing hip prosthesis was initially identified, subsequently removed from the list, and then re-identified the following year when further data were available. All unicompartmental and primary total knee prostheses identified as having a higher than expected rate of revision have continued to be re-identified. INTERPRETATION: It is important that registries use a transparent and accountable process to identify an outlier prosthesis. This paper describes the development, implementation, assessment, and impact of the approach used by the Australian Registry.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherInforma UK Limited
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
dc.titleJoint registry approach for identification of outlier prostheses.
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.3109/17453674.2013.831320
melbourne.affiliation.departmentSurgery (RMH)
melbourne.source.titleActa Orthopaedica
melbourne.source.volume84
melbourne.source.issue4
melbourne.source.pages348-352
dc.rights.licenseCC BY-NC
melbourne.elementsid1241820
melbourne.openaccess.pmchttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3768032
melbourne.contributor.authorde Steiger, Richard
dc.identifier.eissn1745-3682
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record