ReviewEFORT open reviews2022
International comparison of variation in performance between hospitals for THA and TKA: Is it even possible? A systematic review including 33 studies and 8 arthroplasty register reports.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality and Utility of European Cardiovascular and Orthopaedic Registries for the Regulatory Evaluation of Medical Device Safety and Performance Across the Implant Lifecycle: A Systematic Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Pooled it
- Safety notices and registry outlier data measure different aspects of safety and performance of total knee implants: a comparative study of safety notices and register outliers.Acta orthopaedica · 2024Article
- Cost and resource comparison analysis for THA in Switzerland and Austria.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- Over a decade of experience in total knee arthroplasty with a multiradius design and fixed bearing at a single centre: Data from the Catalan Arthroplasty Registry.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty after bariatric surgery: A systematic review.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to improve care for total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), hospitals may want to compare their performance with hospitals in other countries. Pooling data across countries also enable early detection of infrequently occurring safety issues. We therefore aimed to assess the between-hospital variation and definitions used for revision, readmission, and complications across countries. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Emcare, and Academic Search Premier were searched from January 2009 to August 2020 for studies reporting on: (i) primary THA/TKA; (ii) revision, readmission, or complications; and (iii) between-hospital variation. Most recent registry reports of Network of Orthopedic Registries of Europe members were also reviewed. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Integrated quality Criteria for the Review Of Multiple Study designs tool for studies and relevant domains for registries. We assessed agreement for the following domains: (i) outcome definition; (ii) follow-up and starting point; (iii) case-mix adjustment; and (iv) type of patients and hospitals included. Between-hospital variation was reported in 33 (1 high-quality, 13 moderate-quality, and 19 low-quality) studies and 8 registry reports. The range of variation for revision was 0-33% for THA and 0-27% for TKA varying between assessment within hospital admission until 10 years of follow-up; for readmission, 0-40% and 0-32% for THA and TKA, respectively; and for complications, 0-75% and 0-50% for THA and TKA, respectively. Indicator definitions and methodological variables varied considerably across domains. The large heterogeneity in definitions and methods used likely explains the considerable variation in between-hospital variation reported for revision, readmission, and complications , making it impossible to benchmark hospitals across countries or pool data for earlier detection of safety issues. It is necessary to collaborate internationally and strive for more uniformity in indicator definitions and methods in order to achieve reliable international benchmarking in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.