High risk device registries: Global value, costs, and sustainable funding

Babette E. Becherer, Pauline E.R. Spronk, Marc A.M. Mureau, Stephen Mulgrew, A Graeme B. Perks, Birgit Stark, Andrea L. Pusic, David B. Lumenta, Ingrid Hopper, Rodney D. Cooter, Hinne A. Rakhorst

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND:
Well-designed implant registries have been shown to be a worthwhile investment, from both a health and economic perspective. However, many registries do not attain desirable capture rates or lack sufficient funding, potentially leading to premature termination. This study aims to provide information about rarely discussed, yet pivotal topics regarding the long-term survival of implant registries, focusing on costs, funding models, and the role of stakeholders.

METHODS:
Worldwide, relatively recently developed breast device (BD) registries were compared to long-standing, orthopaedic (OD) and cardiovascular device (CD) registries. A standardised questionnaire was sent to the registries' designated representatives with key positions, discussing start-up costs, costs of maintenance, value of investment, governance, stakeholders, funding, and sustainability.

RESULTS:
Thirteen registries were included, originating from nine countries (seven BD registries, five OD registries, one CD registry). In general, start-up costs were comparable, and younger registries were more expensive to maintain. Numerous stakeholders showed interest in registry outcomes. However, only 50% of the registries reported a sustainable funding structure.

CONCLUSION:
This study provides a global perspective on implantable device registries. All registries provided important information, serving three unique purposes by evaluating the quality of healthcare provided, the quality of all registered devices, and processing recall information. Yet, only half of the registries were certain of sustainable funding, and thus their future existence. It is of utmost importance to bring this to the attention of all parties involved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1362-1365
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery
Volume71
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2018

Cite this

Becherer, B. E., Spronk, P. E. R., Mureau, M. A. M., Mulgrew, S., Perks, A. G. B., Stark, B., ... Rakhorst, H. A. (2018). High risk device registries: Global value, costs, and sustainable funding. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 71(9), 1362-1365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2018.05.048
Becherer, Babette E. ; Spronk, Pauline E.R. ; Mureau, Marc A.M. ; Mulgrew, Stephen ; Perks, A Graeme B. ; Stark, Birgit ; Pusic, Andrea L. ; Lumenta, David B. ; Hopper, Ingrid ; Cooter, Rodney D. ; Rakhorst, Hinne A. / High risk device registries : Global value, costs, and sustainable funding. In: Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. 2018 ; Vol. 71, No. 9. pp. 1362-1365.
@article{30aa241f37f549bdb587acd9f4c9daf0,
title = "High risk device registries: Global value, costs, and sustainable funding",
abstract = "BACKGROUND:Well-designed implant registries have been shown to be a worthwhile investment, from both a health and economic perspective. However, many registries do not attain desirable capture rates or lack sufficient funding, potentially leading to premature termination. This study aims to provide information about rarely discussed, yet pivotal topics regarding the long-term survival of implant registries, focusing on costs, funding models, and the role of stakeholders.METHODS:Worldwide, relatively recently developed breast device (BD) registries were compared to long-standing, orthopaedic (OD) and cardiovascular device (CD) registries. A standardised questionnaire was sent to the registries' designated representatives with key positions, discussing start-up costs, costs of maintenance, value of investment, governance, stakeholders, funding, and sustainability.RESULTS:Thirteen registries were included, originating from nine countries (seven BD registries, five OD registries, one CD registry). In general, start-up costs were comparable, and younger registries were more expensive to maintain. Numerous stakeholders showed interest in registry outcomes. However, only 50{\%} of the registries reported a sustainable funding structure.CONCLUSION:This study provides a global perspective on implantable device registries. All registries provided important information, serving three unique purposes by evaluating the quality of healthcare provided, the quality of all registered devices, and processing recall information. Yet, only half of the registries were certain of sustainable funding, and thus their future existence. It is of utmost importance to bring this to the attention of all parties involved.",
author = "Becherer, {Babette E.} and Spronk, {Pauline E.R.} and Mureau, {Marc A.M.} and Stephen Mulgrew and Perks, {A Graeme B.} and Birgit Stark and Pusic, {Andrea L.} and Lumenta, {David B.} and Ingrid Hopper and Cooter, {Rodney D.} and Rakhorst, {Hinne A.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.bjps.2018.05.048",
language = "English",
volume = "71",
pages = "1362--1365",
journal = "Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery",
issn = "1748-6815",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "9",

}

Becherer, BE, Spronk, PER, Mureau, MAM, Mulgrew, S, Perks, AGB, Stark, B, Pusic, AL, Lumenta, DB, Hopper, I, Cooter, RD & Rakhorst, HA 2018, 'High risk device registries: Global value, costs, and sustainable funding' Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 1362-1365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2018.05.048

High risk device registries : Global value, costs, and sustainable funding. / Becherer, Babette E.; Spronk, Pauline E.R.; Mureau, Marc A.M.; Mulgrew, Stephen; Perks, A Graeme B.; Stark, Birgit; Pusic, Andrea L.; Lumenta, David B.; Hopper, Ingrid; Cooter, Rodney D.; Rakhorst, Hinne A.

In: Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Vol. 71, No. 9, 09.2018, p. 1362-1365.

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - High risk device registries

T2 - Global value, costs, and sustainable funding

AU - Becherer, Babette E.

AU - Spronk, Pauline E.R.

AU - Mureau, Marc A.M.

AU - Mulgrew, Stephen

AU - Perks, A Graeme B.

AU - Stark, Birgit

AU - Pusic, Andrea L.

AU - Lumenta, David B.

AU - Hopper, Ingrid

AU - Cooter, Rodney D.

AU - Rakhorst, Hinne A.

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - BACKGROUND:Well-designed implant registries have been shown to be a worthwhile investment, from both a health and economic perspective. However, many registries do not attain desirable capture rates or lack sufficient funding, potentially leading to premature termination. This study aims to provide information about rarely discussed, yet pivotal topics regarding the long-term survival of implant registries, focusing on costs, funding models, and the role of stakeholders.METHODS:Worldwide, relatively recently developed breast device (BD) registries were compared to long-standing, orthopaedic (OD) and cardiovascular device (CD) registries. A standardised questionnaire was sent to the registries' designated representatives with key positions, discussing start-up costs, costs of maintenance, value of investment, governance, stakeholders, funding, and sustainability.RESULTS:Thirteen registries were included, originating from nine countries (seven BD registries, five OD registries, one CD registry). In general, start-up costs were comparable, and younger registries were more expensive to maintain. Numerous stakeholders showed interest in registry outcomes. However, only 50% of the registries reported a sustainable funding structure.CONCLUSION:This study provides a global perspective on implantable device registries. All registries provided important information, serving three unique purposes by evaluating the quality of healthcare provided, the quality of all registered devices, and processing recall information. Yet, only half of the registries were certain of sustainable funding, and thus their future existence. It is of utmost importance to bring this to the attention of all parties involved.

AB - BACKGROUND:Well-designed implant registries have been shown to be a worthwhile investment, from both a health and economic perspective. However, many registries do not attain desirable capture rates or lack sufficient funding, potentially leading to premature termination. This study aims to provide information about rarely discussed, yet pivotal topics regarding the long-term survival of implant registries, focusing on costs, funding models, and the role of stakeholders.METHODS:Worldwide, relatively recently developed breast device (BD) registries were compared to long-standing, orthopaedic (OD) and cardiovascular device (CD) registries. A standardised questionnaire was sent to the registries' designated representatives with key positions, discussing start-up costs, costs of maintenance, value of investment, governance, stakeholders, funding, and sustainability.RESULTS:Thirteen registries were included, originating from nine countries (seven BD registries, five OD registries, one CD registry). In general, start-up costs were comparable, and younger registries were more expensive to maintain. Numerous stakeholders showed interest in registry outcomes. However, only 50% of the registries reported a sustainable funding structure.CONCLUSION:This study provides a global perspective on implantable device registries. All registries provided important information, serving three unique purposes by evaluating the quality of healthcare provided, the quality of all registered devices, and processing recall information. Yet, only half of the registries were certain of sustainable funding, and thus their future existence. It is of utmost importance to bring this to the attention of all parties involved.

U2 - 10.1016/j.bjps.2018.05.048

DO - 10.1016/j.bjps.2018.05.048

M3 - Letter

VL - 71

SP - 1362

EP - 1365

JO - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery

JF - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery

SN - 1748-6815

IS - 9

ER -