Cargando…

New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent studies have revealed deficiencies in the accuracy of data from joint registries when reoperations for prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are reported, particularly when no components are changed. We compared the accuracy of data from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Mark, Ravi, Saiprasad, Frampton, Chris, Luey, Chris, Young, Simon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4967275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27348450
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2016.1171639
_version_ 1782445490392006656
author Zhu, Mark
Ravi, Saiprasad
Frampton, Chris
Luey, Chris
Young, Simon
author_facet Zhu, Mark
Ravi, Saiprasad
Frampton, Chris
Luey, Chris
Young, Simon
author_sort Zhu, Mark
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent studies have revealed deficiencies in the accuracy of data from joint registries when reoperations for prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are reported, particularly when no components are changed. We compared the accuracy of data from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) to a multicenter audit of hospital records to establish the rate of capture for PJI reoperations. METHODS: 4,009 cases undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty performed at 3 tertiary referral hospitals over a 3-year period were audited using multiple hospital datasets and the NZJR. The number of reoperations for PJI that were performed within 2 years of the primary arthroplasty was obtained using both methods and the data were compared. RESULTS: The NZJR reported a 2-year reoperation rate for PJI of 0.67%, as compared to 1.1% from the audit of hospital records, giving the NZJR a sensitivity of 63%. Only 4 of 11 debridement-in-situ-only procedures and 7 of 12 modular exchange procedures were captured in the NZJR. INTERPRETATION: The national joint registry underestimated the rate of reoperation for PJI by one third. Strategies for improving the accuracy of data might include revising and clarifying the registry forms to include all reoperations for PJI and frequent validation of the registry data against other databases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4967275
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49672752017-01-11 New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection Zhu, Mark Ravi, Saiprasad Frampton, Chris Luey, Chris Young, Simon Acta Orthop Articles BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent studies have revealed deficiencies in the accuracy of data from joint registries when reoperations for prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are reported, particularly when no components are changed. We compared the accuracy of data from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) to a multicenter audit of hospital records to establish the rate of capture for PJI reoperations. METHODS: 4,009 cases undergoing total knee or hip arthroplasty performed at 3 tertiary referral hospitals over a 3-year period were audited using multiple hospital datasets and the NZJR. The number of reoperations for PJI that were performed within 2 years of the primary arthroplasty was obtained using both methods and the data were compared. RESULTS: The NZJR reported a 2-year reoperation rate for PJI of 0.67%, as compared to 1.1% from the audit of hospital records, giving the NZJR a sensitivity of 63%. Only 4 of 11 debridement-in-situ-only procedures and 7 of 12 modular exchange procedures were captured in the NZJR. INTERPRETATION: The national joint registry underestimated the rate of reoperation for PJI by one third. Strategies for improving the accuracy of data might include revising and clarifying the registry forms to include all reoperations for PJI and frequent validation of the registry data against other databases. Taylor & Francis 2016-08 2016-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4967275/ /pubmed/27348450 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2016.1171639 Text en © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)
spellingShingle Articles
Zhu, Mark
Ravi, Saiprasad
Frampton, Chris
Luey, Chris
Young, Simon
New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title_full New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title_fullStr New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title_full_unstemmed New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title_short New Zealand Joint Registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
title_sort new zealand joint registry data underestimates the rate of prosthetic joint infection
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4967275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27348450
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2016.1171639
work_keys_str_mv AT zhumark newzealandjointregistrydataunderestimatestherateofprostheticjointinfection
AT ravisaiprasad newzealandjointregistrydataunderestimatestherateofprostheticjointinfection
AT framptonchris newzealandjointregistrydataunderestimatestherateofprostheticjointinfection
AT lueychris newzealandjointregistrydataunderestimatestherateofprostheticjointinfection
AT youngsimon newzealandjointregistrydataunderestimatestherateofprostheticjointinfection