This study evaluated the feasibility of using published data from more than one register to define the performance of different hip implants. In order to obtain estimates of performance for specific types of hip system from different register, we analysed data from the annual reports of five national and one Italian regional register. We extracted the number of implants and rates of implant survival at different periods of follow-up. Our aim was to assess whether estimates of cumulative survival rate were comparable with data from registers from different countries, and our conclusion was that such a comparison could only be performed incompletely.
Systematic and prospective collection of data (Registro degli Interventi di Protesi d’Anca – RIPA-L) on hip replacement operations is underway in the Lazio Region (Italy) as part of a multi-regional registry on orthopaedic prosthetic surgery. The project is partially funded by the Ministry of Health and includes five regions of Italy, coordinated by Istituti Ortopedici Rizzoli, Bologna, in co-operation with the Italian National Institute of Health. The aim of the project is to create – as a first attempt in Italy – a national database on hip replacement operations in order to monitor adverse events related to orthopaedic prostheses. First, in the Lazio region, standardised methods and data collection instruments were developed and assessed in a pilot study at three hospitals in Rome (teaching, public and private). The case report form (CRF) includes identification data, clinical findings, details of the operation (duration, grade of surgeon, and operative technique) and characteristics of the prosthesis. A web-based CRF facilitates data registration ( RIPA-L represents an important instrument to monitor the quality of hip replacement surgery in the Lazio region and to collect information on types of orthopaedic prostheses, contributing to the national database and, more generally, promoting quality in orthopaedic surgery.
There is no consensus regarding the best method of assessing outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. There are now many questionnaires in the literature, well constructed and validated in the original language. Dawson’s questionnaire (1998) is designed as a 12-item self-administered instrument, and has undergone a complete validation procedure in its original English version. Aim of this paper is to present the procedure of cultural adaptation and some data from the validation process of the Italian version of the questionnaire. Two independent translations into Italian and back-translations into English were obtained, from specialised and general translators. The material was then evaluated in a multidisciplinary panel including elderly patients. A provisional version was obtained and tested in a pilot study. Results and comments were reviewed within the panel again which came up with the final version. The questionnaire was administered to 100 patients scheduled for knee replacement. Other outcomes collected included a general health questionnaire, in its validated Italian version (SF-36), and several objective and radiographic parameters. The burden on the patient and comprehension’s difficulties were registered. Validation included the assessment of internal consistency, construct and content validity. Correlation between different parameters were investigated. Test-retest reliability was assessed on 20 patients. Comparisons with the data presented in the original paper were performed. The questionnaires were accepted favourably by the patients, even though the combination with the SF-36 increased the amount of time required for completion. Some difficulties were registered with the comprehension of the answering method, as well as of the meaning of single items. Results of the validation process were substantially equivalent to those of the original paper.
