Ville Turppo1, Reijo Sund2, Joonas Sirola1, Heikki Kröger3, Jukka Huopio1. 1. Department of Orthopedics, Traumatology and Hand Surgery, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. 2. Kuopio Musculoskeletal Research Unit (KMRU), Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland (UEF), Kuopio, Finland; Centre for Research Methods, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 3. Department of Orthopedics, Traumatology and Hand Surgery, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland; Kuopio Musculoskeletal Research Unit (KMRU), Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland (UEF), Kuopio, Finland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no actual validation studies of the Finnish Arthroplasty Register (FAR), and only a few studies about the accuracy of self-reported hip and knee arthroplasty exist. Therefore, we examine how reliably total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties can be identified from multiple data sources, including self-reports, the hospital discharge register, the arthroplasty register, and medical records. METHODS: Data from the FAR and from the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register (FHDR) during the years 1980-2010 were cross-checked to identify all THA and TKA events for the Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study cohort (n = 14,220). Unclear events were further checked from the medical records. After establishing a gold standard, by referring to confirmed THAs and TKAs, we examined the validity of self-reports in identifying the prevalent population with THA/TKA and in identifying incident THA/TKA. RESULTS: Completeness of 2820 total arthroplasty events was 96.1% in FAR and 98.3% in FHDR. The self-reports had 95.1% sensitivity and 92.9% positive predictive value (PPV) to identify population with THA and for TKA sensitivity was 94.6% and PPV 95.2%. Self-reports' sensitivity of finding the actual surgery events was 65.3% and PPV 85.4% for THA and for TKA sensitivity was 62.9% and PPV 83.4%. CONCLUSION: The best way to identify THAs and TKAs in Finland is to combine data from the FAR and the FHDR. Self-reports can be considered as suitable to identify the prevalent population with THA/TKA, and they do not work as well to identify the actual surgery events.
BACKGROUND: There are no actual validation studies of the Finnish Arthroplasty Register (FAR), and only a few studies about the accuracy of self-reported hip and knee arthroplasty exist. Therefore, we examine how reliably total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties can be identified from multiple data sources, including self-reports, the hospital discharge register, the arthroplasty register, and medical records. METHODS: Data from the FAR and from the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register (FHDR) during the years 1980-2010 were cross-checked to identify all THA and TKA events for the Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study cohort (n = 14,220). Unclear events were further checked from the medical records. After establishing a gold standard, by referring to confirmed THAs and TKAs, we examined the validity of self-reports in identifying the prevalent population with THA/TKA and in identifying incident THA/TKA. RESULTS: Completeness of 2820 total arthroplasty events was 96.1% in FAR and 98.3% in FHDR. The self-reports had 95.1% sensitivity and 92.9% positive predictive value (PPV) to identify population with THA and for TKA sensitivity was 94.6% and PPV 95.2%. Self-reports' sensitivity of finding the actual surgery events was 65.3% and PPV 85.4% for THA and for TKA sensitivity was 62.9% and PPV 83.4%. CONCLUSION: The best way to identify THAs and TKAs in Finland is to combine data from the FAR and the FHDR. Self-reports can be considered as suitable to identify the prevalent population with THA/TKA, and they do not work as well to identify the actual surgery events.
Authors: Valtteri J Panula; Elina M Ekman; Mikko S Venäläinen; Inari Laaksonen; Riku Klén; Jaason J Haapakoski; Antti P Eskelinen; Laura L Elo; Keijo T Mäkelä Journal: Scand J Surg Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 2.360