Porter Martyn, Rolfson Ola, de Steiger Richard
Centre for Hip Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Lancashire, England.
Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Oct 19;104(Suppl 3):23-27. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.22.00561.
National-level joint arthroplasty registries were among the first large orthopaedic surgery databases and represent some of the longest-running and most influential big databases in our profession. Nordic registries were among the first registries and were followed by excellent registries in the United Kingdom and Australia. In this article, we describe each of these registries and highlight the data elements collected, the data points that can be obtained by linking the national arthroplasty registries to other national registries or databases, the completeness of data, and the strengths and weaknesses of each database. Each of these registries publishes an annual report that is available online, and each also can do more detailed analysis of certain aspects of its data for special studies.When evaluating and interpreting data from national joint registries, the user should be aware that, despite the power of huge numbers, there remain numerous limitations to the observational data. Strong selection biases exist with regard to which patients are chosen for which procedure. Surgeons of different skill levels may use one technique or implant differentially compared with another. The end points that registries collect differ widely: for example, some report only hip dislocations leading to revision rather than all dislocations. Registries in countries in which there are long wait times for revision surgery may report artificially low revision rates compared with countries in which revision surgery is more easily accessible. Despite these limitations, registries have the merit of reporting the actual results of huge numbers of surgical procedures performed across the spectrum of hospitals, surgeons, and patients, making the data extremely powerful for identifying trends, identifying early signs of problems related to certain implants or implant classes, and identifying associations between variables that can be further studied to determine if the effect is causal.
国家级关节置换登记系统是最早一批大型骨科手术数据库,也是我们这个行业运行时间最长、最具影响力的一些大型数据库。北欧的登记系统是最早的一批,随后英国和澳大利亚也建立了出色的登记系统。在本文中,我们将介绍这些登记系统中的每一个,并重点说明所收集的数据元素、通过将国家关节置换登记系统与其他国家登记系统或数据库相链接可获取的数据点、数据的完整性以及每个数据库的优缺点。这些登记系统中的每一个都会发布年度报告,可在线获取,并且每个系统还能针对特殊研究对其数据的某些方面进行更详细的分析。在评估和解读来自国家关节登记系统的数据时,用户应意识到,尽管大量数据有其强大之处,但观测数据仍存在诸多局限性。在选择哪些患者接受何种手术方面存在很强的选择偏倚。不同技能水平的外科医生使用一种技术或植入物的方式可能与另一种有所不同。登记系统收集的终点差异很大:例如,有些只报告导致翻修的髋关节脱位,而不是所有脱位情况。与翻修手术更容易获得的国家相比,在翻修手术等待时间长的国家,登记系统报告的翻修率可能会人为地偏低。尽管存在这些局限性,但登记系统的优点是报告了在各类医院、外科医生和患者中进行的大量外科手术的实际结果,使得这些数据对于识别趋势、识别与某些植入物或植入物类别相关问题的早期迹象以及识别变量之间的关联极具效力,这些关联可进一步研究以确定其影响是否具有因果关系。