以肩关节置换术为例评价登记在肩关节置换术中的价值。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Fabian Blanke, Charlotte Enghusen, Andreas Enz, Florian Haasters, Christoph Lutter, Wolfram Mittelmeier, Thomas Tischer
{"title":"以肩关节置换术为例评价登记在肩关节置换术中的价值。","authors":"Fabian Blanke,&nbsp;Charlotte Enghusen,&nbsp;Andreas Enz,&nbsp;Florian Haasters,&nbsp;Christoph Lutter,&nbsp;Wolfram Mittelmeier,&nbsp;Thomas Tischer","doi":"10.1055/a-1644-2032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>As a consequence of the Swedish model, endoprosthesis registers have become increasingly important worldwide. Due to the increasing number of joint replacements at the shoulder, these are being increasingly included in the register databases - in addition to interventions at the hip and knee joint. In this study, the value of endoprosthesis registers is investigated, using the example of shoulder endoprosthetics and including a comparison with clinical studies.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The annual reports of 32 different endoprosthesis registers with data on hip, knee and/or shoulder arthroplasty were analysed. The number of operations and demographic patient data for all areas of endoprosthetics were examined. In addition, a more detailed consideration of variables such as the primary diagnosis, the cause of the revision, the revision rate depending on risk factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM scores) was carried out exclusively for the shoulder joint endoprostheses. Using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis, clinical studies were compared to registry data with special regard to the revision rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 endoprosthesis registers could be included, 9 of these collected data on shoulder arthroplasty. The main primary diagnoses were osteoarthritis (40.6%), rotator cuff defect arthropathy (30.2%) and fractures (17.6%). The most commonly used shoulder joint endoprosthesis was the inverse prosthesis (47.3%). The proportion of revision surgeries in total shoulder arthroplasty operations was less than 10% in all registers. In addition to the revision rate, the PROM scores were sometimes used in the registers to evaluate the success of the prosthesis. Compared to registry data, clinical studies showed more heterogeneous data with a significantly higher revision rate of over 10% in long-term follow-up - using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Register data are a valuable source of information in shoulder arthroplasty and can make a significant contribution to the quality assurance of endoprosthetic treatments. Compared to clinical studies, they primarily provide data on durability of different endoprosthesis and give lower revision rates. Clinical studies use PROM scores and clinical and radiological examinations to focus only on individual implants and surgical centres on the one hand and much more on the functional results on the other.</p>","PeriodicalId":51219,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Orthopadie Und Unfallchirurgie","volume":"161 3","pages":"280-289"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the Value of Registries in Shoulder Arthroplasty Using Reverse Arthroplasty as an Example.\",\"authors\":\"Fabian Blanke,&nbsp;Charlotte Enghusen,&nbsp;Andreas Enz,&nbsp;Florian Haasters,&nbsp;Christoph Lutter,&nbsp;Wolfram Mittelmeier,&nbsp;Thomas Tischer\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-1644-2032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>As a consequence of the Swedish model, endoprosthesis registers have become increasingly important worldwide. Due to the increasing number of joint replacements at the shoulder, these are being increasingly included in the register databases - in addition to interventions at the hip and knee joint. In this study, the value of endoprosthesis registers is investigated, using the example of shoulder endoprosthetics and including a comparison with clinical studies.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The annual reports of 32 different endoprosthesis registers with data on hip, knee and/or shoulder arthroplasty were analysed. The number of operations and demographic patient data for all areas of endoprosthetics were examined. In addition, a more detailed consideration of variables such as the primary diagnosis, the cause of the revision, the revision rate depending on risk factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM scores) was carried out exclusively for the shoulder joint endoprostheses. Using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis, clinical studies were compared to registry data with special regard to the revision rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 endoprosthesis registers could be included, 9 of these collected data on shoulder arthroplasty. The main primary diagnoses were osteoarthritis (40.6%), rotator cuff defect arthropathy (30.2%) and fractures (17.6%). The most commonly used shoulder joint endoprosthesis was the inverse prosthesis (47.3%). The proportion of revision surgeries in total shoulder arthroplasty operations was less than 10% in all registers. In addition to the revision rate, the PROM scores were sometimes used in the registers to evaluate the success of the prosthesis. Compared to registry data, clinical studies showed more heterogeneous data with a significantly higher revision rate of over 10% in long-term follow-up - using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Register data are a valuable source of information in shoulder arthroplasty and can make a significant contribution to the quality assurance of endoprosthetic treatments. Compared to clinical studies, they primarily provide data on durability of different endoprosthesis and give lower revision rates. Clinical studies use PROM scores and clinical and radiological examinations to focus only on individual implants and surgical centres on the one hand and much more on the functional results on the other.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Orthopadie Und Unfallchirurgie\",\"volume\":\"161 3\",\"pages\":\"280-289\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Orthopadie Und Unfallchirurgie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1644-2032\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Orthopadie Und Unfallchirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1644-2032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

作为瑞典模式的结果,内假体注册在世界范围内变得越来越重要。由于肩关节置换术的数量不断增加,除了髋关节和膝关节的干预外,这些手术也越来越多地被纳入登记数据库。在本研究中,以肩部内假体为例,并与临床研究进行比较,研究了内假体登记的价值。材料和方法:对32个不同的人工髋关节、膝关节和/或肩关节置换术的年度报告进行分析。检查了所有领域的手术数量和患者人口统计数据。此外,更详细地考虑了变量,如原发性诊断,翻修的原因,翻修率取决于危险因素和患者报告的结果测量(PROM评分),仅针对肩关节内假体进行。以反向肩关节假体为例,将临床研究与注册数据进行比较,特别考虑翻修率。结果:共纳入20个假体登记,其中9个为肩关节置换术资料。原发性诊断主要为骨关节炎(40.6%)、肩袖缺损性关节病(30.2%)和骨折(17.6%)。最常用的肩关节内假体是反向假体(47.3%)。所有登记的全肩关节置换术中翻修手术的比例小于10%。除了复习率外,PROM分数有时也被用于评估假体的成功。与注册数据相比,临床研究显示更多的异质性数据,在长期随访中,以反向肩关节假体为例,修正率明显高于10%。结论:登记资料是肩关节置换术中有价值的信息来源,对保证假体内治疗的质量有重要贡献。与临床研究相比,它们主要提供不同假体的耐用性数据,翻修率较低。临床研究使用PROM分数以及临床和放射学检查,一方面只关注单个植入物和手术中心,另一方面更多地关注功能结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of the Value of Registries in Shoulder Arthroplasty Using Reverse Arthroplasty as an Example.

Introduction: As a consequence of the Swedish model, endoprosthesis registers have become increasingly important worldwide. Due to the increasing number of joint replacements at the shoulder, these are being increasingly included in the register databases - in addition to interventions at the hip and knee joint. In this study, the value of endoprosthesis registers is investigated, using the example of shoulder endoprosthetics and including a comparison with clinical studies.

Material and methods: The annual reports of 32 different endoprosthesis registers with data on hip, knee and/or shoulder arthroplasty were analysed. The number of operations and demographic patient data for all areas of endoprosthetics were examined. In addition, a more detailed consideration of variables such as the primary diagnosis, the cause of the revision, the revision rate depending on risk factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM scores) was carried out exclusively for the shoulder joint endoprostheses. Using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis, clinical studies were compared to registry data with special regard to the revision rate.

Results: A total of 20 endoprosthesis registers could be included, 9 of these collected data on shoulder arthroplasty. The main primary diagnoses were osteoarthritis (40.6%), rotator cuff defect arthropathy (30.2%) and fractures (17.6%). The most commonly used shoulder joint endoprosthesis was the inverse prosthesis (47.3%). The proportion of revision surgeries in total shoulder arthroplasty operations was less than 10% in all registers. In addition to the revision rate, the PROM scores were sometimes used in the registers to evaluate the success of the prosthesis. Compared to registry data, clinical studies showed more heterogeneous data with a significantly higher revision rate of over 10% in long-term follow-up - using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis.

Conclusion: Register data are a valuable source of information in shoulder arthroplasty and can make a significant contribution to the quality assurance of endoprosthetic treatments. Compared to clinical studies, they primarily provide data on durability of different endoprosthesis and give lower revision rates. Clinical studies use PROM scores and clinical and radiological examinations to focus only on individual implants and surgical centres on the one hand and much more on the functional results on the other.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
102
期刊介绍: Das Forum für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie aus einer Hand Aktuelles aus Klinik, Wissenschaft und Forschung Ein unabhängiges Peer-Review-Verfahren sichert Qualität, Relevanz und Plausibilität der Daten Modernes Layout: Klare Gliederung, farbige Abbildungen, strukturierte Tabellen Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie aktuell: Berichte und Reportagen zu den wichtigsten Themen im Fach
×
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