Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21681503›Full record

ArticleDer Orthopade2011

[Utilization rates of lower extremity prostheses in Germany and Switzerland: A comparison of the years 2005-2008].

I Falbrede, M Widmer, S Kurtz, D Schneidmüller, M Dudda, C Röder

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Orthopade, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. [Treatment of periprosthetic and peri-implant fractures : modern plate osteosynthesis procedures].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2012
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

I FalbredeInstitut für Evaluative Forschung in der Medizin, Universität Bern, Stauffacherstr.78, CH-3014, Bern, Schweiz.
M Widmer
S Kurtz
D Schneidmüller
M Dudda
C Röder
University of Bern · CHBG University Hospital Bergmannsheil Bochum · DEDrexel University · USGoethe University Frankfurt · DESwiss Health Observatory · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the United States the use of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has substantially increased over the last decade. It is not known, however, if this trend can be applied to other countries as well. The aim of the current study was therefore a detailed comparison of hip, knee, and ankle arthroplasty utilization rates in Germany and Switzerland in the years 2005-2008 and a secondary comparison with the United States. PATIENTS AND

methodsBased on datasets from the national statistical offices the number of inhabitants, gender and age distributions and the number of primary and revision surgeries were determined. These figures served for calculating primary, revision and overall surgical volumes, revision burden, primary and revision rates per 100,000 inhabitants, gender and age-specific primary and revision rates. A comparably smaller dataset was provided for the respective US analyses.

resultsIn Germany, Switzerland and the US the number of implanted total and partial hip arthroplasties per 100,000 inhabitants rose from 235.8, 238.2 and 116.8 in 2005 to 254.7, 262.7 and 127.3 in 2008, respectively. For total and partial knee arthroplasty the rates were 156.3, 140.1 and 178.2 implantations in 2005 and 188.3, 176.8 and 213.6 in 2008, respectively. With 13.6% the revision burden in Germany was 3.6% higher than in Switzerland and accounted for 11.2% in the US. In 2008 it was 15.1% in Germany, was hence 4.6% higher than in Switzerland and remained stable at 11.2% in the US. For knee replacements the 2005 German revision burden was 11.1% which was 3.5% higher than in Switzerland and was 7.4% in the US. In 2008 it was 12.8% in Germany and 4.2% lower in Switzerland and in the US it accounted for 8.9%. In all three countries the revision burden for knee arthroplasty was constantly lower than for hip arthroplasty.

conclusionIn all three countries the primary rates for hip and knee replacements rose over the years but those for knee arthroplasty to a higher extent. The 2008 revision burden was highest in Germany for both types of arthroplasty. In Switzerland there was a transient revision burden decrease with a new increase from the year 2007 onwards. The US hip replacement utilization rates per 100,000 inhabitants were considerably lower than those in Germany and Switzerland and for knee replacements they were slightly higher.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, AnkleArthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleForecastingGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedProsthesis FailureReoperationSwitzerlandUnited StatesUtilization Review

Identifiers

PMID21681503
OpenAlexW110575179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.