Comparison of hernia registries: the CORE project

IntroductionThe aim of the international CORE project was to explore the databases of the existing hernia registries and compare them in content and outcome variables.MethodsThe CORE project was initiated with representatives from all established hernia registries (Danish Hernia Database, Swedish Hernia Registry, Herniamed, EuraHS, Club Hernie, EVEREG, AHSQC) in March 2015 in Berlin. The following categories were used to compare the registries: initiation and funding, data collection and use for certification of hernia centers, patient data and data protection, operative data, registration of complications and follow-up data.ResultsThe Danish Hernia Database is the only one to qualify as a genuine national registry where participation is compulsory for entry of all procedures by all surgeons performing a hernia operation. All other registries have to be considered as voluntary and completeness of data depends upon the participating hospitals and surgeons. Only the Danish Hernia Database and the Swedish Hernia Registry are publicly funded. All other registries are reliant on financial support from the medical technology industry. As an incentive for voluntary participation in a hernia registry, hospitals or surgeons are issued a certificate confirming that they are taking part in a quality assurance study for hernia surgery. Due to data protection and privacy regulations, most registries are obliged or have chosen to enter their patient data anonymously or coded. The Danish Hernia Database and Swedish Hernia Registry utilize a national personal patient code. In the Herniamed Registry, patient data are saved in a coded and anonymous format after obtaining the patient’s informed consent.ConclusionDespite the differences in the way data are collected for each of the listed hernia registries, the data are indispensable in clinical research.

[1]  H. Kehlet,et al.  Nationwide quality improvement of groin hernia repair from the Danish Hernia Database of 87,840 patients from 1998 to 2005 , 2008, Hernia.

[2]  J. Pereira,et al.  Initial results of the National Registry of Incisional Hernia. , 2016, Cirugia espanola.

[3]  J. Rosenberg,et al.  Establishment and initial experiences from the Danish Ventral Hernia Database , 2010, Hernia.

[4]  M. Kocher,et al.  Overcoming the funding challenge: the cost of randomized controlled trials in the next decade. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[5]  W. M. Barclay Surgery , 1894, Bristol medico-chirurgical journal.

[6]  H. Chandler Database , 1985 .

[7]  M. Goldblatt,et al.  Design and implementation of the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative (AHSQC): improving value in hernia care , 2016, Hernia.

[8]  S. Haapaniemi,et al.  The Swedish hernia register: an eight year experience , 2000, Hernia.

[9]  J. Pereira,et al.  Initial Results of the National Registry of Incisional Hernia , 2016 .

[10]  J. Jeekel,et al.  Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair , 2013, Hernia.

[11]  Stuart Walker Repair , 2018, Design Realities.

[12]  José Antonio Bello Pereira,et al.  Resultados iniciales del Registro Español de Hernia Incisional , 2016 .

[13]  Nicolette de Keizer,et al.  Model Formulation: Defining and Improving Data Quality in Medical Registries: A Literature Review, Case Study, and Generic Framework , 2002, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[14]  G. Campanelli,et al.  EuraHS: the development of an international online platform for registration and outcome measurement of ventral abdominal wall hernia repair , 2012, Hernia.

[15]  F. Köckerling The Need for Registries in the Early Scientific Evaluation of Surgical Innovations , 2014, Front. Surg..

[16]  F. Köckerling,et al.  Herniamed: an Internet-based registry for outcome research in hernia surgery , 2012, Hernia.

[17]  F. Köckerling Data and outcome of inguinal hernia repair in hernia registers – a review of the literature , 2017, Innovative surgical sciences.

[18]  F. Köckerling,et al.  What is a Certified Hernia Center? The Example of the German Hernia Society and German Society of General and Visceral Surgery , 2014, Front. Surg..

[19]  I. Tannock,et al.  Randomised controlled trials and population-based observational research: partners in the evolution of medical evidence , 2014, British Journal of Cancer.

[20]  P. D. da Luz,et al.  Cardioprotection conferred by exercise training is blunted by blockade of the opioid system , 2011, Clinics.

[21]  F. Fregni,et al.  Limits to clinical trials in surgical areas , 2011, Clinics.

[22]  J. McNeil,et al.  Clinical‐quality registries: their role in quality improvement , 2010, The Medical journal of Australia.

[23]  F. Köckerling,et al.  The Importance of Registries in the Postmarketing Surveillance of Surgical Meshes , 2017, Annals of surgery.

[24]  A. Hartz,et al.  A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  Bradley Efron,et al.  Recent Trends in National Institutes of Health Funding of Surgical Research , 2002, Annals of surgery.

[26]  H. Kulaçoğlu,et al.  Current Status of Hernia Centres Around the Globe , 2015, Indian Journal of Surgery.

[27]  Christopher B. Granger,et al.  Registry-based randomized clinical trials—a new clinical trial paradigm , 2015, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[28]  J. Gillion,et al.  Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair using a novel intraperitoneal lightweight mesh coated with hyaluronic acid: 1-year follow-up from a case–control study using the Hernia-Club registry , 2016, Hernia.