Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Pabinger C.,EAR European Arthroplasty Register Scientific Office | Pabinger C.,Medical University of Graz | Geissler A.,Care Technology Systems
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage | Year: 2014

Background: Hip arthroplasty and revision surgery is growing exponentially in OECD countries, but rates vary between countries. Methods: We extracted economic data and utilization rates data about hip arthroplasty done in OECD countries between 1990 and 2011. Absolute number of implantations and compound annual growth rates were computed per 100,000 population and for patients aged 65 years old and over and for patients aged 64 years and younger. Results: In the majority of OECD countries, there has been a significant increase in the utilization of total hip arthroplasty in the last 10 years, but rates vary to a great extent: In the United States, Switzerland, and Germany the utilization rate exceeds 200/100,000 population whereas in Spain and Mexico rates are 102 and 8, respectively. There is a strong correlation between gross domestic product (GDP) and health care expenditures per capita with utilization rate. Utilization rates in all age groups have continued to rise up to present day. A seven fold higher growth rate was seen in patients aged 64 years and younger as compared to older patients. Conclusion: We observed a 38-fold variation in the utilization of hip arthroplasty among OECD countries, correlating with GDP and health care expenditures. Over recent years, there has been an increase in the utilization rate in most countries. This was particularly evident in the younger patients. Due to increasing life expectancy and the disproportionally high use of arthroplasty in younger patients we expect an exponential increase of revision rate in the future. © 2014 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Source


Pabinger C.,EAR European Arthroplasty Register Scientific Office | Pabinger C.,Medical University of Graz | Berghold A.,Medical University of Graz | Boehler N.,EAR European Arthroplasty Register Scientific Office | And 2 more authors.
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage | Year: 2013

Objective: To assess revision rates after knee arthroplasty by comparing the cumulative results from worldwide clinical studies and arthroplasty registers. We hypothesised that the revision rate of all clinical studies of a given implant and register data would not differ significantly. Methods: A systematic review of clinical studies in indexed peer-reviewed journals was performed followed by internal and external validation. Parameters for measurement of revision were applied (Revision for any reason, Revisions per 100 observed component years). Register data served as control group. Results: Thirty-six knee arthroplasty systems were identified to meet the inclusion criteria: 21 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems, 14 unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) systems, one patello-femoral implant system. For 13 systems (36%), no published study was available that contained revision data. For 17 implants (47%), publications were available dealing with radiographic, surgical or technical details, but power was too weak to compare revision rates at a significant level. Six implant systems (17%) had a significant number of revisions published and were finally analysed. In general, developers report better results than independent users. Studies from developers represent an overproportional share of all observed component years. Register data report overall 10-year revision rates of TKA of 6.2% (range: 4.9-7.8%), rates for UKA are 16.5% (range: 9.7-19.6%). Conclusion: Revision rates of all clinical studies of a given implant do not differ significantly from register data. However, significant differences were found between the revision rates published by developers and register data. Therefore the different data need to be interpreted in the context of the source of the information. © 2012 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Source

Discover hidden collaborations