Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42053629›Full record

ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Certification and its influence on the work in certified arthroplasty centers].

Gabriela von Lewinski, Holger Haas

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Gabriela von LewinskiKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30265, Hannover, Deutschland. vonlewinski.gabriela@mh-hannover.de.
Holger HaasZentrum für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie und Sportmedizin, Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe certification of an arthroplasty center (EndoCert System) is a process that requires a lot of time, effort, and money. Clear evidence of better clinical results and an improved quality of arthroplasty surgeries is still missing and is also difficult to provide on the basis of fundamental considerations. Nevertheless, working in a certified arthroplasty center offers various benefits. REQUIREMENTS: The catalog of requirements provides the center with clear structures, and the implementation of clinical pathways requires a close collaboration of different professional groups. This is elaborate but timesaving in the long run. The appointment of EndoCert-registered surgeons performing a minimum number of operations is, on the one hand, a crucial contribution to the quality, because they do an experienced job. On the other hand, registered surgeons play an important role in the education of residents. Key data and quality indicators help the centers to recognize strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks. ASSESSMENT: The EndoCert system integrates other quality assurance in its assessment, such as the EPRD (Endoprothesenregister Deutschland), allowing benchmarking with other hospitals. An issue to be discussed in this context is a missing risk stratification, which may possibly lead to contorted results. The claim of quality should also include the management of complex situations and problems.

Indexed as

Hip arthroplastyHospitalsKnee arthroplastyQuality indicators, healthcareQuality management

Identifiers

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.