(218) Association of Joint Replacement Registries with Burden of Revision Changes

Saturday, August 27, 2022

8:00 AM – 6:00 PM CEST

Location: Hall C

Publication Number: 892

Presenting Author(s)

Charles Ebuka Okafor, MPharm
– Griffith University, Acacia Ridge, Queensland, Australia

Co-Author(s)

Son Nghiem
– Senior research fellow, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Joshua Byrnes
– Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Background: The effect of joint replacement registries on outcomes such as revision burden is uncertain. While some countries with joint replacement registries have recorded reductions in revision burden, other countries without joint replacement registries have also reported similar reductions.

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate whether joint replacement registries are associated with the burden of revision changes while controlling for confounders that could affect the association.

Methods: The assessment was performed by a difference-in-differences statistical approach using a panel regression model. The revision burden in the registry periods of registry countries was compared to the non-registry periods of the registry and non-registry countries. The effect of confounders was controlled by the linear trend in the model. Data were collected from 1980 to 2018. Registry data were obtained from joint replacement registries' annual reports, while non-registry data were obtained from each included country’s pooled hospitals annual revision burden reported in the literature.

Results: Data were obtained from 12 registry periods and 8 non-registry periods. The average difference in revision burden in the registry periods of registry countries relative to the non-registry periods of registry and non-registry countries was statistically significant for hip 0.038 (3.80%; 95% CI: 0.025 – 0.051; p-value < 0.001), and knee 0.016 (1.63%; 95% CI: 0.010 – 0.023; p-value < 0.001). The establishment of joint replacement registries was associated with a 3.80 and 1.63 percentage points reduction in the revision burden for hip and knee, respectively for the whole sampling period.

Conclusions: Joint replacement registries are associated with a significant reduction in the burden of revision. Although revision burden reduces over time even without the registries, the establishment of joint replacement registries potentiates the reduction. The establishment of joint replacement registries in non-registry countries would be a worthwhile decision as it will further improve the outcomes of arthroplasty surgeries.