Abstract
Abstract
Background
Registries are powerful clinical investigational tools. Although in hospitals registries may be mandated, industry-sponsored, international registries are voluntary and therefore can require clearer objectives and more planning. The registry also needs sufficient resources and appropriate measurement tools to motivate long-term participation and ensure success.
Methods
We summarize our learnings from 10 years of running a medical device registry that surveys patient-reported benefits of hearing implants.
Results
We enlisted 77 participating clinics globally, who actively recruited a total of more than 1500 hearing implant users. We identified the stages in developing a registry specific to hearing loss. Furthermore, we report the challenges and successes in design and implementation and make recommendations for future registries.
Conclusions
Data collection infrastructure needs to be kept up to date throughout the defined registry lifetime, and it is essential to oversee data quality and completeness. Compliance at registry sites is important for data quality and needs to be weighed against the cost of site monitoring. To motivate sites to enter data accurately and expeditiously, we facilitated easy access to their own data which helped to support their clinical routine.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02004353. 9th December 2013.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Pharmacology (medical),Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference38 articles.
1. Andries E, Gilles A, Topsakal V, Vanderveken OM, Van de Heyning P, Van Rompaey V, et al. Systematic review of quality of life assessments after Cochlear implantation in older adults. Audiol Neurootol. 2020:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1159/000508433 Epub ahead of print. PMID: 32653882.
2. Artyomenko A. Real-world evidence generation: studies, databases, methods, and analytics. 2018. https://www.emwa.org/media/3030/2-how-rwe-is-generated-studies-databases-methods-and-analytics-a-artyomenko.pdf. Accessed 4 Nov 2020.
3. Banerjee S, Campbell B, Rising J, Coukell A, Sedrakyan A. Long-term active surveillance of implantable medical devices: an analysis of factors determining whether current registries are adequate to expose safety and efficacy problems. BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol. 2019;1(1):e000011. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2019-000011.
4. Berrettini S, Arslan E, Baggiani A, Burdo S, Cassandro E, Cuda D, et al. Analysis of the impact of professional involvement in evidence generation for the HTA process, subproject “cochlear implants”: methodology, results and recommendations. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2011;31(5):273–80 PMID: 22287819; PMCID: PMC3262413.
5. Bisdas T, Bohan P, Lescan M, Zeebregts CJ, Tessarek J, van Herwaarden J, et al. Research methodology and practical issues relating to the conduct of a medical device registry. Clin Trials. 2019;16(5):490–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774519855395 Epub 2019 Jun 11. PMID: 31184490.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献