Kaiser permanente implant registries benefit patient safety, quality improvement, cost-effectiveness

Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 246-252

  Paxton, Elizabeth W ^a   Kiley, Mary Lou ^a   Love, Rebecca ^a   Barber, Thomas C ^b   Funahashi, Tadashi T ^a   Inacio, Maria C S ^a  

^a KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

^b KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; REGISTER; STANDARD; STATISTICS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATIONS; HUMANS; PATIENT SAFETY; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PRODUCT SURVEILLANCE, POSTMARKETING; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; REGISTRIES; UNITED STATES;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84877971414     PISSN: 15537250     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1553-7250(13)39033-3     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. US. Food and Drug Administration. Devices Approved in 2012. (Updated: Feb 14, 2013.) Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ ProductsandMedicalProcedures/DeviceApprovalsandClearances/PMAApprovals/ ucm295841.htm.
2. US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Hospital Stays Involving Musculoskeletal Procedures, 1997-2005. Statistical Brief 34. Merrill C, Elixhauser A. Jul 2007. (Updated: Jul 10, 2007.) Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/ statbriefs/sb34.jsp.
3. Zhan C, et al. Cardiac device implantation in the United States from 1997 through 2004: A population-based analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23 Suppl 1:13-19.
4. Kurtz S, et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4): 780-785.
5. Hip and knee implant list prices rise 6.3%. Orthopedic Network News. 2008;19(1):1, 4-9. Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://recon.orthopedicnetworknews. com/archives/onn191s1.pdf.
6. Robinson JC, et al. Variability in costs associated with total hip and knee replacement implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Sep 19;94(18):1693-1698.
7. Espicom. The Medical Device Market: USA. Accessed Apr 22, 2013. http://www.espicom.com/usa-medical-device-market.
8. Obrist K. When an implanted device is recalled, do you have a system to deal with it? Managed Care. May 2010. Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.managedcaremag.com/archives/1005/1005.devicerecalls.html.
9. US Government Accountability Office. Medical Devices: FDA Should Enhance Its Oversight of Recalls. GAO-11-468. Jun 14, 2011. Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-468.
10. Ong KL, et al. Risk of subsequent revision after primary and revision total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(11):3070-3076.
11. Karter AJ, et al. Ethnic disparities in diabetic complications in an insured population. JAMA 2002 May 15;287(19):2519-2527. Erratum in: JAMA. 2002 Jul 3;288(1):46.
12. Khatod M, et al. Knee replacement: Epidemiology, outcomes, and trends in Southern California: 17,080 replacements from 1995 through 2004. Acta Orthop. 2008;79(6):812-819.
13. Koebnick C, et al. Sociodemographic characteristics of members of a large, integrated health care system: Comparison with US Census Bureau data. Perm J. 2012;16(3):37-41.
14. National Cardiovascular Data Registry, American College of Cardiology Foundation. About the NCDR. Accessed Apr 30, 2013. https://www.ncdr.com/webncdr/ home/about-the-ncdr.
15. Inacio MC, et al. Leveraging electronic medical records for surveillance of surgical site infection in a total joint replacement population. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(4):351-359.
16. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQuality Indicators. (Updated: Mar 2012.) Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.qualityindicators.ahrq. gov/.
17. US Food and Drug Administration. Safety: Background and Definitions. (Updated: Jun 24, 2009.) Accessed Apr 30, 2013. http://www.fda.gov/Safety/ Recalls/ucm165546.htm.
18. Khatod M, et al. Pulmonary embolism prophylaxis in more than 30,000 total knee arthroplasty patients: Is there a best choice? J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(2): 167-172.
19. Namba RS, Inacio MC, Paxton EW. Risk factors associated with surgical site infection in 30,491 primary total hip replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012; 94(10):1330-1338.
20. Khatod M, et al. Prophylaxis against pulmonary embolism in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Oct 5;93(19): 1767-1772.
21. Labek G, et al. Revision rates after total joint replacement: Cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(3):293-297. Erratum in: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(7):998.
22. Inacio MC, et al. Alternative bearings in total knee arthroplasty: Risk of early revision compared to traditional bearings. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(2):145-152.
23. Namba RS, et al. Risk of revision for fixed versus mobile-bearing primary total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Nov 7;94(21):1929-1935.
24. Bini SA, et al. Does pre-coating total knee tibial implants affect the risk of aseptic revision? Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(3):367-370.
25. Barber T, et al. The relative risk of early aseptic revision for surface replacement arthroplasty. Proceedings of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting, Chicago, Mar 19-23, 2013. Accessed Apr 22, 2013. http://www.abstractsonline.com/plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?mID=2984&sKey= 91b4c03d-99f9-428c-a662-93d0c13a476d&cKey=66768edf-a464-4a05-bfd0- 390c0f53d265&mKey=%7B342D5FB6-3E41-46BB-82B4-861286ECFB41%7D.
26. Namba RS, et al. Risk factors for aseptic revision of primary total knee arthroplasty. Proceedings of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting, Chicago, Mar 19-23, 2013. Accessed Apr 22, 2013. http://www. abstractsonline.com/plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?mID=2984&sKey= 91b4c03d-99f9-428c-a662-93d0c13a476d&cKey=66768edf-a464-4a05-bfd0- 390c0f53d265&mKey=%7B342D5FB6-3E41-46BB-82B4-861286ECFB41%7D 2013.
27. Herberts P, Malchau H. Long-term registration has improved the quality of hip replacement: A review of the Swedish THR Register comparing 160,000 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;71(2):111-121.
28. von Knoch F, Marchie A, Malchau H. Total joint registries: A foundation for evidence-based arthroplasty. Virtual Mentor. 2010 Feb 1:12(2):124-129.
29. Sedrakyan A, Paxton EW, Marinac-Dabic D. Stages and tools for multinational collaboration: The perspective from the Coordinating Center of the International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries (ICOR). J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Dec 21;93 Suppl 3:76-80.
30. Sedrakyan A, et al. The International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries: Overview and summary. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Dec 21;93 Suppl 3:1-12.