Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 2/2013

01-02-2013 | Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Hip Society

Lessons Learned From Managing a Prospective, Private Practice Joint Replacement Registry: A 25-year Experience

Authors: Joshua T. Carothers, MD, Richard E. White, MD, Krishna R. Tripuraneni, MD, Mohammad W. Hattab, MS, Michael J. Archibeck, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In 1984, we developed a private practice joint replacement registry (JRR) to prospectively follow patients undergoing THA and TKA to assess clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications, and implant survival. Little has been reported in the literature regarding management of this type of database, and it is unclear whether and how the information can be useful for addressing longer-term questions.

Questions/purposes

We answered the following questions: (1) What is the rate of followup for THA and TKA in our JRR? (2) What factors affect followup? (3) How successful is this JRR model in capturing data and what areas of improvement are identified? And (4) what costs are associated with maintaining this JRR?

Methods

We collected clinical data on all 12,047 patients having primary THA and TKA since 1984. Clinical and radiographic data were collected at routine followup intervals and entered into a prospective database. We searched this database to assess the rate of successful followup and data collection and to compare the effect of patient variables on followup. Costs related to database management were evaluated.

Results

Followup was poor at every time interval after surgery, with a tendency for worsening over time. Patients with a complication and those younger than 70 years tended to followup with greater frequency. There were difficulties with data capture and substantial expenses related to managing the database.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight the difficulties in managing a JRR. Followup is poor and data collection is often incomplete. Newer technologies that allow easier tracking of patients and facilitate data capture may streamline this process and control costs.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Aleem A, Clohisy JC, Steger-May K, Kamath G, Wright RW. Total knee arthroplasty: factors associated with patient compliance with followup. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2011;20:182–187.PubMed Aleem A, Clohisy JC, Steger-May K, Kamath G, Wright RW. Total knee arthroplasty: factors associated with patient compliance with followup. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2011;20:182–187.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Berry DJ, Kessler M, Morrey BF. Maintaining a hip registry for 25 years: Mayo Clinic experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;344:61–68.PubMedCrossRef Berry DJ, Kessler M, Morrey BF. Maintaining a hip registry for 25 years: Mayo Clinic experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;344:61–68.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Bhatia M, Obadare Z. An audit of the out-patient follow-up of hip and knee replacements. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003;85:32–35.PubMedCrossRef Bhatia M, Obadare Z. An audit of the out-patient follow-up of hip and knee replacements. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003;85:32–35.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Clohisy JC, Kamath GV, Byrd GD, Steger-May K, Wright RW. Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1848–1854.PubMedCrossRef Clohisy JC, Kamath GV, Byrd GD, Steger-May K, Wright RW. Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1848–1854.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Gioe TJ, Killeen KK, Mehle S, Grimm K. Implementation and application of a community total joint registry: a twelve-year history. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1399–1404.PubMedCrossRef Gioe TJ, Killeen KK, Mehle S, Grimm K. Implementation and application of a community total joint registry: a twelve-year history. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1399–1404.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of The Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13–14.PubMed Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of The Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13–14.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Joshi AB, Gill GS, Smith PL. Outcome in patients lost to follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:149–153.PubMedCrossRef Joshi AB, Gill GS, Smith PL. Outcome in patients lost to follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:149–153.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:780–785.PubMedCrossRef Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:780–785.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lavernia CJ. Cost-effectiveness of early surgical intervention in silent osteolysis. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:277–279.PubMedCrossRef Lavernia CJ. Cost-effectiveness of early surgical intervention in silent osteolysis. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:277–279.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ong KL, Mowat FS, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern MT, Kurtz SM. Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:22–28.PubMedCrossRef Ong KL, Mowat FS, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern MT, Kurtz SM. Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:22–28.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Paxton EW, Furnes O, Namba RS, Inacio MC, Fenstad AM, Havelin LI. Comparison of the Norwegian knee arthroplasty register and a United States arthroplasty registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(suppl 3):20–30.PubMedCrossRef Paxton EW, Furnes O, Namba RS, Inacio MC, Fenstad AM, Havelin LI. Comparison of the Norwegian knee arthroplasty register and a United States arthroplasty registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(suppl 3):20–30.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Paxton EW, Inacio MC, Khatod M, Yue EJ, Namba RS. Kaiser Permanente National Total Joint Replacement Registry: aligning operations with information technology. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2646–2663.PubMedCrossRef Paxton EW, Inacio MC, Khatod M, Yue EJ, Namba RS. Kaiser Permanente National Total Joint Replacement Registry: aligning operations with information technology. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2646–2663.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Sethuraman V, McGuigan J, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Rothman RH. Routine follow-up office visits after total joint replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:183–186.PubMedCrossRef Sethuraman V, McGuigan J, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Rothman RH. Routine follow-up office visits after total joint replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:183–186.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Teeny SM, York SC, Mesko W, Rea RE. Long-term follow-up care recommendations after total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:954–962.PubMedCrossRef Teeny SM, York SC, Mesko W, Rea RE. Long-term follow-up care recommendations after total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:954–962.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Wasson J, Gaudette C, Whaley F, Sauvigne A, Baribeau P, Welch HG. Telephone care as a substitute for routine clinic follow-up. JAMA. 1992;267:1788–1793.PubMedCrossRef Wasson J, Gaudette C, Whaley F, Sauvigne A, Baribeau P, Welch HG. Telephone care as a substitute for routine clinic follow-up. JAMA. 1992;267:1788–1793.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Lessons Learned From Managing a Prospective, Private Practice Joint Replacement Registry: A 25-year Experience
Authors
Joshua T. Carothers, MD
Richard E. White, MD
Krishna R. Tripuraneni, MD
Mohammad W. Hattab, MS
Michael J. Archibeck, MD
Publication date
01-02-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2541-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 2/2013 Go to the issue