Search Results
Search for other papers by Geke A. W. Denissen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Liza N. van Steenbergen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Wouter T. Lollinga in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Biomechanical Engineering, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Nico J. J. Verdonschot in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Dept. of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Berend W. Schreurs in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Dept. of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Rob G. H. H. Nelissen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
characteristics and its implant library containing hip, knee, ankle, shoulder and elbow prosthetic component characteristics; and 2) the process of building and maintaining an implant library with the utilization of the barcode scanning to import prosthetic
Search for other papers by Volkmar Jansson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alexander Grimberg in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Oliver Melsheimer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Carsten Perka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD Deutsche Endoprothesenregister gGmbH), Berlin, Germany
Search for other papers by Arnd Steinbrück in
Google Scholar
PubMed
surgery (hip or knee arthroplasty; primary or revision; elective or acute fracture), information of relevant preoperative procedures or reasons for revision etc., as well as the scan of barcode information of the implanted arthroplasty components. In
Search for other papers by Marc Beirer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Chlodwig Kirchhoff in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Peter Biberthaler in
Google Scholar
PubMed
) started with inclusion of hip and knee arthroplasties. Implants are recorded by scanning the related barcode and between July 2013 and May 2015 310 hospitals participated and transmitted data on approximately 105 000 patients. 15 There is currently
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark
Search for other papers by Claus Varnum in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alma Bečić Pedersen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Search for other papers by Ola Rolfson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Department of Orthopedics, Malmö, Sweden
Search for other papers by Cecilia Rogmark in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Search for other papers by Ove Furnes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Search for other papers by Geir Hallan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
Search for other papers by Keijo Mäkelä in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Surgery, Epworth HealthCare, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Search for other papers by Richard de Steiger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Centre for Hip Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust, Lancashire, United Kingdom
Search for other papers by Martyn Porter in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Orthopaedic Research Unit, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
Search for other papers by Søren Overgaard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
do these evaluations routinely, but others are not able to do so. Regarding data quality, there is a need for the use of implant barcodes and catalogue numbers to identify specific implants at risk including sizes, offset etc. Regarding revision