We aimed to assess the comparability of data in joint replacement
registries and identify ways of improving the comparisons between
registries and the overall monitoring of joint replacement surgery. We conducted a review of registries that are full members of
the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries with publicly
available annual reports in English. Of the six registries which
were included, we compared the reporting of: mean age, definitions
for revision and re-operation, reasons for revision, the approach
to analysing revisions, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)
for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hip resurfacing
arthroplasty (HRA).Aims
Materials and Methods
