Literature DB >> 25367173

[Registries as a tool for optimizing safety of endoprostheses. Experiences from other countries and the setup of the German arthroplasty register].

Joachim Hassenpflug1, Thoralf R Liebs.   

Abstract

There has previously been no structured long-term documentation of the results of hip and knee prosthesis operations in Germany. This article presents the objectives, structure and data flow of the newly established German arthroplasty registry (EPRD). The EPRD is run as a subdivision of the German Society for Orthopedics and Orthopedic Surgery (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Orthopädie und orthopädische Chirurgie, DGOOC). It is dedicated to scientific principles and guarantees independency and immediate feedback to surgeons. The cooperation between insurance funds, hospitals, industry and scientific society is the key to success. Additional data acquisition and bureaucratic formalities are limited to a minimum and in particular there is no use of paper. Involving the health insurance funds provides access to relevant routine data. The implant documentation is facilitated by means of an implant library and barcode scanning in the operating room. The EPRD documents the survival of implants including the reasons for revision. Although the highest level of patient data protection is guaranteed, individual patients can be identified in case of implant recalls.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25367173     DOI: 10.1007/s00103-014-2057-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz        ISSN: 1436-9990            Impact factor:   1.513


  5 in total

1.  [What can we learn in future from the data of the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) in comparison to other registries?].

Authors:  V Jansson; A Steinbrück; J Hassenpflug
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 2.  [Quality criteria in arthroplasty].

Authors:  Max Jaenisch; Karl Dieter Heller; Dieter Christian Wirtz
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-07-23       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 3.  [Registries of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma : Overview and perspectives of the DGU and DGOOC registries].

Authors:  T Kostuj; B Kladny; R Hoffmann
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  Can Bar Code Scanning Improve Data Capture in a National Register? Findings from the Irish National Orthopaedic Register.

Authors:  Shane P Russell; James M Broderick; Sean D O'Dea; Eoin Fahey; Paddy Kenny; James Cashman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-07-20       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Good Practice Data Linkage (GPD): A Translation of the German Version.

Authors:  Stefanie March; Silke Andrich; Johannes Drepper; Dirk Horenkamp-Sonntag; Andrea Icks; Peter Ihle; Joachim Kieschke; Bianca Kollhorst; Birga Maier; Ingo Meyer; Gabriele Müller; Christoph Ohlmeier; Dirk Peschke; Adrian Richter; Marie-Luise Rosenbusch; Nadine Scholten; Mandy Schulz; Christoph Stallmann; Enno Swart; Stefanie Wobbe-Ribinski; Antke Wolter; Jan Zeidler; Falk Hoffmann
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.