Key result
A review of 7 national shoulder arthroplasty registries revealed large heterogeneity, with the majority of relevant risk factors for prosthetic failure not being included.
Why the study?
National shoulder arthroplasty registries seem to lack sufficient information for evidence-based decision-making, with large differences in registered parameters and outcome measurement across countries.
Do current national shoulder arthroplasty registries collect sufficient common data and risk factors to enable evidence-based decision-making?
Do current national shoulder arthroplasty registries collect sufficient common data and risk factors to enable evidence-based decision-making?
Current national shoulder arthroplasty registries lack sufficient common datasets and relevant risk factor parameters to enable pooling of data for evidence-based shoulder surgery.
Shoulder arthroplasty registries lack harmonized datasets; standardization required before pooled analyses can inform practice or research.
National shoulder arthroplasty registries are currently used to assess incidence, indication, type of prosthesis and revision, but they seem to lack sufficient information to lead to evidence based decision-making in shoulder surgery. There appears to be a large difference in registered parameters and outcome measurement per country. First we investigated whether existing registries have sufficient common datasets to enable pooling of data. Second, we determined whether known risk factors for prosthetic failure are being recorded. Through a non-systematic literature review studies on registries were analyzed for included parameters. Seven national registries were scrutinized for the data collected and these were classified according to categories of risk factors for failure: patient-, implant and surgeon related, and other parameters. This shows a large heterogeneity of registered parameters between countries. The majority of parameters shown to be relevant to outcome and failure of shoulder prostheses are not included in the studied registries. International agreement on parameters and outcome measurement for registries is paramount to enable pooling and comparison of data. If we intend to use the registries to provide us with evidence to improve prosthetic shoulder surgery, we need adjustment of the different parameters to be included.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karelse et al. (2021) conducted a review in Shoulder arthroplasty. National shoulder arthroplasty registries was evaluated on Inclusion of known risk factors for prosthetic failure. A review of 7 national shoulder arthroplasty registries revealed large heterogeneity, with the majority of relevant risk factors for prosthetic failure not being included.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: