Early Benchmarking Total Hip Arthroplasty Implants Using Data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI).

IF 1.7 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Pub Date : 2021-11-24 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.2147/ORR.S325042
Heather A Chubb, Eric R Cornish, Brian R Hallstrom, Richard E Hughes
{"title":"Early Benchmarking Total Hip Arthroplasty Implants Using Data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI).","authors":"Heather A Chubb, Eric R Cornish, Brian R Hallstrom, Richard E Hughes","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S325042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Benchmarking arthroplasty implant revision risk is an informative way to address implant performance. National benchmarking efforts exist in the United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Australia. Recently, the International Prosthesis Benchmarking Working Group, including representatives from industry, academia, and national registries, produced a guideline describing arthroplasty benchmarking methodology. The proposal was applied to data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI) to assess its feasibility for benchmarking implants in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Primary elective total hip arthroplasty procedures performed for osteoarthritis between 2/15/2012 and 12/31/2018 and their associated revisions were identified in the MARCQI registry. The guidelines recommend that all prostheses combinations receive an early benchmark if they have at least 250 procedures at risk and the revision rate does not exceed the pre-determined standard of 2% at 2 years and 3% at 5 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 72,949 primary cases met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 1369 had revisions. Twenty-nine and six stem/cup combinations satisfied the minimum case requirement at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Three implant combinations would not receive a benchmark at 2 years: Secur-Fit/Trident, Anthology/Reflection 3, Taperloc 133/G7.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The guideline can be implemented in the United States by a regional registry. Moreover, not all hip implants currently in use would receive an early benchmark. This raises concern as these implant combinations represent a significant number of cases in Michigan, some with increasing utilization.</p>","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":"13 ","pages":"215-228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/05/b2/orr-13-215.PMC8627892.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S325042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Benchmarking arthroplasty implant revision risk is an informative way to address implant performance. National benchmarking efforts exist in the United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Australia. Recently, the International Prosthesis Benchmarking Working Group, including representatives from industry, academia, and national registries, produced a guideline describing arthroplasty benchmarking methodology. The proposal was applied to data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI) to assess its feasibility for benchmarking implants in the United States.

Methods: Primary elective total hip arthroplasty procedures performed for osteoarthritis between 2/15/2012 and 12/31/2018 and their associated revisions were identified in the MARCQI registry. The guidelines recommend that all prostheses combinations receive an early benchmark if they have at least 250 procedures at risk and the revision rate does not exceed the pre-determined standard of 2% at 2 years and 3% at 5 years.

Results: A total of 72,949 primary cases met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 1369 had revisions. Twenty-nine and six stem/cup combinations satisfied the minimum case requirement at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Three implant combinations would not receive a benchmark at 2 years: Secur-Fit/Trident, Anthology/Reflection 3, Taperloc 133/G7.

Conclusion: The guideline can be implemented in the United States by a regional registry. Moreover, not all hip implants currently in use would receive an early benchmark. This raises concern as these implant combinations represent a significant number of cases in Michigan, some with increasing utilization.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

利用密歇根关节置换注册协作质量倡议(MARCQI)的数据对全髋关节置换术植入物进行早期基准分析。
背景:关节置换术植入物翻修风险基准是解决植入物性能问题的一种有效方法。英国、荷兰和澳大利亚都开展了国家基准制定工作。最近,国际假体基准工作组(International Prosthesis Benchmarking Working Group)(包括来自工业界、学术界和国家登记处的代表)制定了一份指南,描述了关节成形术基准方法。该建议适用于密歇根关节成形术注册协作质量倡议(MARCQI)的数据,以评估其在美国对植入物进行基准测试的可行性:MARCQI登记处确定了2012年2月15日至2018年12月31日期间因骨关节炎实施的初次选择性全髋关节置换术及其相关翻修。指南建议,如果至少有250例手术存在风险,且2年和5年的翻修率分别不超过2%和3%的预定标准,则所有假体组合均应接受早期基准:共有 72,949 个初次病例符合纳入标准。结果:共有 72,949 例初次病例符合纳入标准,其中 1369 例进行了翻修。分别有29个和6个柄/杯组合在2年和5年时符合最低病例要求。有三种种植体组合在 2 年时无法达到基准要求:Secur-Fit/Trident、Anthology/Reflection 3、Taperloc 133/G7:结论:该指南可通过地区登记处在美国实施。此外,并非所有正在使用的髋关节植入物都能获得早期基准。这引起了人们的关注,因为这些植入体组合在密歇根州的病例中占有相当大的比例,有些病例的使用率还在不断提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopedic Research and Reviews
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信