Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 7 of 7
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 11, Issue 1 | Pages 10 - 11
11 Jan 2022
Snowden GT Clement ND Zhang S Xue Q Simpson AHRW


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1271 - 1273
1 Oct 2020
Scott CEH Simpson AHRW Pankaj P


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 4 | Pages 403 - 406
1 Apr 2020
Trompeter A


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 7 | Pages 755 - 756
1 Jul 2019
Kakar S Haddad FS


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 1 | Pages 1 - 2
1 Jan 2019
Clauss M Breusch SJ


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 12 | Pages 636 - 638
1 Dec 2018
Roussot MA Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 7 | Pages 871 - 874
1 Jul 2015
Breakwell LM Cole AA Birch N Heywood C

The effective capture of outcome measures in the healthcare setting can be traced back to Florence Nightingale’s investigation of the in-patient mortality of soldiers wounded in the Crimean war in the 1850s.

Only relatively recently has the formalised collection of outcomes data into Registries been recognised as valuable in itself.

With the advent of surgeon league tables and a move towards value based health care, individuals are being driven to collect, store and interpret data.

Following the success of the National Joint Registry, the British Association of Spine Surgeons instituted the British Spine Registry. Since its launch in 2012, over 650 users representing the whole surgical team have registered and during this time, more than 27 000 patients have been entered onto the database.

There has been significant publicity regarding the collection of outcome measures after surgery, including patient-reported scores. Over 12 000 forms have been directly entered by patients themselves, with many more entered by the surgical teams.

Questions abound: who should have access to the data produced by the Registry and how should they use it? How should the results be reported and in what forum?

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:871–4.