The role of national registries in improving patient safety for hip and knee replacements

scientific article published on 16 October 2017

The role of national registries in improving patient safety for hip and knee replacements is …
instance of (P31):
scholarly articleQ13442814

External links are
P6179Dimensions Publication ID1092242146
P356DOI10.1186/S12891-017-1773-0
P932PMC publication ID5644143
P698PubMed publication ID29037237

P50authorAnne LübbekeQ96048143
P2093author name stringAndrew J Carr
Amanda I Adler
Daniel Prieto-Alhambra
Alan J Silman
Christophe Barea
P2860cites workThe cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review of published literatureQ24622561
Regulatory approval of new medical devices: cross sectional studyQ24658647
Utilization rates of knee-arthroplasty in OECD countries.Q30567343
Failure rates of metal-on-metal hip resurfacings: analysis of data from the National Joint Registry for England and WalesQ30572034
Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and WalesQ30835962
From data to policy: good practices and cautionary talesQ31106774
The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association: a unique collaboration between 3 national hip arthroplasty registries with 280,201 THRsQ33660035
The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (www.knee.se).Q33795753
Failure rates of stemmed metal-on-metal hip replacements: analysis of data from the National Joint Registry of England and WalesQ34195354
Knee replacement.Q34259439
Delays and difficulties in assessing metal-on-metal hip implantsQ34282946
New medical device regulations ahead - what does that mean for arthroplasty registers?Q34457882
Transforming Healthcare Delivery: Integrating Dynamic Simulation Modelling and Big Data in Health Economics and Outcomes Research.Q34499256
Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacingsQ34790686
Patterns of risk of cancer in patients with metal-on-metal hip replacements versus other bearing surface types: a record linkage study between a prospective joint registry and general practice electronic health records in EnglandQ34825245
The next critical role of orthopedic registriesQ35197571
Hydroxyapatite coating does not improve uncemented stem survival after total hip arthroplasty!Q35197607
Comparative assessment of implantable hip devices with different bearing surfaces: systematic appraisal of evidenceQ35580133
A new universal, standardized implant database for product identification: a unique tool for arthroplasty registriesQ35626046
Risk of cancer in first seven years after metal-on-metal hip replacement compared with other bearings and general population: linkage study between the National Joint Registry of England and Wales and hospital episode statisticsQ35866758
Increased Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Cohort StudyQ36580903
Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scoresQ36893066
Early detection of adverse drug events within population-based health networks: application of sequential testing methods.Q36979056
The operation of the century: total hip replacementQ36983030
Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries Part II. Recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis.Q37077503
Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidanceQ37230105
Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessmentQ37259556
Primary hip replacement prostheses and their evidence base: systematic review of literature.Q37503908
Hip arthroplasty. Part 2: normal and abnormal radiographic findings.Q37595887
Improving medical device regulation: the United States and Europe in perspectiveQ37639295
Countrywise results of total hip replacement. An analysis of 438,733 hips based on the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database.Q37667112
Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK 'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys.Q37872384
Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessmentQ38067863
Deep infection after total hip replacement: a method for national incidence surveillance.Q38270846
IDEAL-D: a rational framework for evaluating and regulating the use of medical devices.Q38379721
Utilization rates of hip arthroplasty in OECD countries.Q39201349
The Main Cause of Death Following Primary Total Hip and Knee Replacement for Osteoarthritis: A Cohort Study of 26,766 Deaths Following 332,734 Hip Replacements and 29,802 Deaths Following 384,291 Knee ReplacementsQ40258945
Projections of US prevalence of arthritis and associated activity limitationsQ40361739
Using Medications for Prediction of Revision after Total Joint Arthroplasty.Q40719579
Failed innovation in total hip replacement. Diagnosis and proposals for a cureQ40806168
Pain levels after total hip replacement: their use as endpoints for survival analysisQ41340932
The EU-ADR Web Platform: delivering advanced pharmacovigilance toolsQ42679414
Joint responsibility: the need for a national arthroplasty registerQ43188691
No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendationsQ43510923
The stepwise introduction of innovation into orthopedic surgery: the next level of dilemmasQ44244323
Analytical challenges for emerging public health surveillanceQ44327493
Nested randomized trials in large cohorts and biobanks: studying the health effects of lifestyle factorsQ44655832
The randomized registry trial--the next disruptive technology in clinical research?Q44663056
The International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries: overview and summaryQ46773704
All patients with metal-on-metal hip implants should undergo tests, says MHRA.Q47959760
Setting benchmark revision rates for total hip replacement: analysis of registry evidenceQ49147998
Introducing new technology: a stepwise algorithm.Q52081426
A comparative assessment of small-head metal-on-metal and ceramic-on-polyethylene total hip replacement.Q53511538
Cancer after total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysisQ80077496
Increased long-term mortality in patients less than 55 years old who have undergone knee replacement for osteoarthritis: results from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty RegisterQ80411890
Real-time vaccine safety surveillance for the early detection of adverse eventsQ81382227
Metal-on-metal failures--in science, regulation, and policyQ83644495
The failure of survivorshipQ83929408
Simultaneously assessing intended and unintended treatment effects of multiple treatment options: a pragmatic "matrix design"Q84231276
Implantable device regulation in EuropeQ84866791
Strong association between smoking and the risk of revision in a cohort study of patients with metal-on-metal total hip arthroplastyQ87421196
P433issue1
P304page(s)414
P577publication date2017-10-16
P1433published inBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersQ15751716
P1476titleThe role of national registries in improving patient safety for hip and knee replacements
P478volume18

Reverse relations

cites work (P2860)
Q88715527Editorial Comment: 6th International Congress of Arthroplasty Registries
Q64892945Feasibility of identifying important changes in care management resulting from cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) using hospital episode data in patients who activate the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) pathway.
Q92840613Impact of hip arthroplasty registers on orthopaedic practice and perspectives for the future
Q98774666Overview of Randomized Controlled Trials in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (34,020 Patients): What Have We Learnt?
Q92643800Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elective hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty: protocol for a prospective cohort study
Q64970272Registry stakeholders.

Search more.