ArticleActa orthopaedica2022
Decreased burden of revision hip replacements despite substantial rise in prevalence: a register-based analysis in Finland.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diverging trends in primary and revision arthroplasty in Germany: projections and implications for healthcare delivery for the next ten years.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Fixation Methods in Primary Hip Arthroplasty: A Nationwide, Registry-Based Observational Study in Romania (2001-2024).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeWhile the incidence of THR operations has been established, little is known about the prevalence or the ratio of the annual number of revision THRs to the total number of THRs in the general population. By combining data from nationwide registers, we calculated the annual prevalence of THRs and the revision burden caused by THR survivors in Finland. PATIENTS AND
methodsAll primary THRs performed between 1980 and 2020 were identified from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register (FAR). Patient deaths were extracted from the Finnish Digital and Population Data Services Agency and THR revisions and removals from the FAR and the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register. We analyzed annual THR prevalence by dividing the number of THRs by the population aged 40 or older and the revision burden factor (RBF) by dividing the annual number of revisions by the total number of primary and revision THRs in the population. The proportions of bilateral implants and patients with THRs performed more than 10 years earlier (older THRs) were identified.
resultsTHR prevalence in Finland increased rapidly, reaching 3.6% in 2020. Between 2010 and 2020, the number of THRs increased by 50% and the prevalence of THRs by 38%. In 2020, the proportion of bilateral THRs had risen to 29% and the proportion of patients with older THRs to 36%. The RBF decreased between 1996 and 2020 from 3.1% to 1.3% (age- and sex-adjusted proportion ratio PR 0.42 [95% CI 0.39-0.45]).
interpretationDespite the decrease in the RBF, the rapidly increasing prevalence of THRs potentially increases the number of revisits and revisions and thus poses a challenge for healthcare 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.