Official websites use. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. Correspondence should be sent to Mr S. Sabah; e-mail: shiraz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC license, which permits copying and redistributing the material in any medium or format, remixing, transforming and building upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original author and source are credited, and changes made are indicated.
This may be done in a reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. Arthroplasty registries are important for the surveillance of joint replacements and the evaluation of outcome.
Independent validation of registry data ensures high quality. The ability for orthopaedic implant retrieval centres to validate registry data is not known. A total of 67 procedures on the NJR and revised pairs of components from the RC were included.
We were able to link procedures However, procedures The outcome recorded by the NJR as either revised, unrevised or death for a primary procedure was incorrect in 79 linked cases The rate of registry-retrieval linkage and correct assignment of outcome code improved over time.
Registry-retrieval linkage provided a novel means for the validation of data, particularly for component fields. This study suggests that NJR reports may underestimate rates of revision for many types of metal-on-metal hip replacement. This is topical given the increasing scope for NJR data. We recommend a system for continuous independent evaluation of the quality and validity of NJR data. With this increased scope for publication of NJR data, there is a need for independent validation of their dataset.
