Assessment of Extractability and Accuracy of Electronic Health Record Data for Joint Implant Registries

Key Points Question Are the data in a large US electronic health record (EHR) complete and accurate enough to track trends in implant use and to assess the durability of implants (hereafter referred to as implant survivorship)? Findings In this cohort study, EHR records of patients who had total hip arthroplasty in all Veterans Health Administration hospitals since 2000 were automatically reviewed using novel software; 80% to 95% of hip replacement components used since 2014 were accurately identified, trends in implant use matched known national trends, and known poor implants were found to be negative outliers. Meaning Automated analysis of the EHR provides a low-cost, low-overhead method to assess implant use and performance.

[1]  T. Vail,et al.  Data for registry and quality review can be retrospectively collected using natural language processing from unstructured charts of arthroplasty patients. , 2020, The bone & joint journal.

[2]  Jennifer E. Moore,et al.  Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality , 2020, Definitions.

[3]  Valentina Pedoia,et al.  Incremental inputs improve the automated detection of implant loosening using machine-learning algorithms. , 2020, The bone & joint journal.

[4]  Christopher Ré,et al.  Medical device surveillance with electronic health records , 2019, npj Digital Medicine.

[5]  D. Mohr,et al.  External Determinants of Veterans’ Utilization of VA Health Care , 2018, Health services research.

[6]  Christopher Ré,et al.  Snorkel: Rapid Training Data Creation with Weak Supervision , 2017, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[7]  N. Shah,et al.  Enhanced Quality Measurement Event Detection: An Application to Physician Reporting , 2017, EGEMS.

[8]  David G. Lewallen,et al.  Comparing contemporary revision burden among hip and knee joint replacement registries , 2016, Arthroplasty today.

[9]  J. Brooks,et al.  New Paradigms for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research in Electronic Medical Records: An Example of Detecting Urinary Incontinence Following Prostatectomy , 2016, EGEMS.

[10]  N. Pratt,et al.  Lower prosthesis-specific 10-year revision rate with crosslinked than with non-crosslinked polyethylene in primary total knee arthroplasty , 2015, Acta Orthopaedica.

[11]  T. Wright,et al.  The International Consortium of Orthopaedic Registries: overview and summary. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[12]  K. Søballe,et al.  Excessive distal migration of fiber-mesh coated femoral stems , 2011, Acta orthopaedica.

[13]  N. Dreyer,et al.  Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide , 2010 .

[14]  Elizabeth W Paxton,et al.  Kaiser Permanente National Total Joint Replacement Registry: Aligning Operations With Information Technology , 2010, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  B F Morrey,et al.  Maintaining a hip registry for 25 years. Mayo Clinic experience. , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  Lloyd Ss.  Automated information systems provide health information management support to veterans' healthcare. , 1992 .

[17]  Birgitte Espehaug,et al.  The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register , 2000 .

[18]  S. S. Lloyd.  Automated information systems provide health information management support to veterans' healthcare. , 1992, Journal of AHIMA.