Suppr超能文献

不同类型医院中植入物注册数据采集方法的设计、实施与比较。

Design, implementation, and comparison of methods for collecting implant registry data at different hospital types.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave A41, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.

出版信息

J Arthroplasty. 2012 Jun;27(6):842-50.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.12.014. Epub 2012 Jan 28.

Abstract

Practical issues surrounding the official establishment of a national arthroplasty registry in the United States remain. The purpose of this study was to compare compliance and accuracy rates associated with 3 methods for voluntarily collecting implant registry data at 3 different hospital types. Methods examined included (1) scannable paper forms, (2) online forms comprising keypunching for implant data input, and (3) the same electronic form but incorporating barcode scanning for implant data entry. Overall compliance was low (930/1761; 52.8%) and decreased with each successive data collection phase. Total accuracy rate was 62.5% (578/925) and varied significantly among sites (P < .001). Even with relatively simple reporting systems, compliance was poor. This emphasizes the need for direct surgeon involvement, strict oversight, and a feedback system to ensure validity, particularly if a volunteer-based system is used.

摘要

在美国,建立国家关节置换登记处的实际问题仍然存在。本研究的目的是比较 3 种不同医院类型自愿收集植入物登记数据的方法的依从性和准确性。所检查的方法包括(1)可扫描的纸质表格,(2)包含植入物数据输入的在线表格,以及(3)相同的电子表格,但包含用于植入物数据输入的条形码扫描。总体依从性较低(930/1761;52.8%),并且随着每个连续的数据收集阶段而降低。总体准确率为 62.5%(578/925),并且在各个站点之间差异显著(P <.001)。即使使用相对简单的报告系统,依从性也很差。这强调了需要直接让外科医生参与、严格监督和反馈系统,以确保有效性,特别是如果使用基于自愿的系统。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验