The Manitoba Joint Replacement Registry: validation of a provincial hip and knee arthroplasty registry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2026.45997Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Hip, Knee, Regional registry, ValidationAbstract
Background and purpose: Regional registries can offer increased dataset linkages and analysis opportunities compared with national registries. However, registry datasets should be properly assessed before their use. The purpose of our study was to validate the completeness and accuracy of the Manitoba Joint Replacement Registry (MJRR) by comparing it with comprehensive databases.
Methods: We identified hip and knee arthroplasty patients in the MJRR ≥ 18 years old who had surgery between 2008 and 2023. We compared our data cohort with the hospital Discharge Abstracts Database (DAD) and the Medical Services Database (MSD) through percentage agreement (proportion identical) and Cohen’s kappa to analyze accuracy and completeness.
Results: We identified 64,472 potential patients included in at least 1 of these 3 datasets. MJRR coverage increased from 68.2% in 2008 to 97.1% in 2023. The percentage agreement between the MJRR, DAD, and MSD was high. No 2 variables matched lower than 90.6%, and all Cohen’s kappa scores were at least within the substantial agreement range (0.61–0.80) with most in the near perfect agreement range (0.81–1.00). Large urban hospitals achieved almost 100% MJRR coverage for all diagnoses, while rural hospitals captured nearly all elective procedures but almost no hip arthroplasty for fractures.
Conclusion: We showed that our regional joint replacement registry contains high completeness of data. We believe that the MJRR is a valuable resource, and its data can be used and trusted for quality initiatives and research projects.
Downloads
References
Singh J, Politis A, Loucks L, Hedden D R, Bohm E R. Trends in revision hip and knee arthroplasty observations after implementation of a regional joint replacement registry. Can J Surg 2016; 59(5): 304-10. doi: 10.1503/cjs.002916. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cjs.002916
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80-B(1): 63-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78-B(2): 185-90. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.78B2.0780185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.78B2.0780185
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M F, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 2011; 20(10): 1727-36. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x
Rolfson O, Bohm E, Franklin P, Lyman S, Denissen G, Dawson J, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries: report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries Part II. Recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis. Acta Orthop 2016 5; 87(Suppl 1): 9-23. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816
Ware J E, Kosinski M, Keller S D. A 12-Item Short-Form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care 1996 Mar; 34(3): 220.
Canadian Institute for Health Information. PROMs Data Collection Manual: Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2021.
George & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation. Manitoba’s Patient Reported Measurement (PRM) strategy 2022. Winnipeg: George & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation.
Rolfson O, Wissig S, Van Maasakkers L, Stowell C, Ackerman I, Ayers D, et al. Defining an International Standard set of outcome measures for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: consensus of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis Working Group. Arthritis Care Res 2016; 68(11): 1631-9. doi: 10.1002/acr.22868. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22868
Roos L L, Mustard C A, Nicol J P, McLerran D F, Malenka D J, Young T K, et al. Registries and administrative data: organization and accuracy. Med Care 1993; 31(3): 201-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199303000-00002
Wilson J M, Broida S E, Maradit-Kremers H, Browne J B, Springer B D, Berry D J, et al. Is the American Joint Replacement Registry able to correctly classify revision total knee arthroplasty procedural diagnoses? J Arthroplasty 2023; 38(6): S32-S35.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.03.016
Lindgren J V, Gordon M, Wretenberg P, Kärrholm J, Garellick G. Validation of reoperations due to infection in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15(1): 384. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-384
Heo S M, Naylor J M, Harris I A, Churches T R. Reliability of patient-reported complications following hip or knee arthroplasty procedures. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19(1): 15. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0645-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0645-0
Enrico C, Valentini R, Laricchuita P, S M Aldeen, Carrani E, Falcone T, et al. Can we trust administrative data in joint arthroplasty? A validation study against the Italian Arthroplasty Registry data as a gold standard. Ann Ist Super Sanità 2025; 61(3): 191-8. doi: 10.4415/ANN_25_03_05.
Landis J R, Koch G G. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics 1977; 33(1): 159. doi: 10.2307/2529310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Arthursson A J, Furnes O, Espehaug B, Havelin L I, Söreide J A. Validation of data in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register and the Norwegian Patient Register: 5,134 primary total hip arthroplasties and revisions operated at a single hospital between 1987 and 2003. Acta Orthop 2005; 76(6): 823-8. doi: 10.1080/17453670510045435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670510045435
Barr C J, Barbalace R J, Wessinger S J, Bragdon C R, Kwon Y M, Malchau H. Validation of a Hospital-Based Joint Registry. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27(10): 1766-71. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.04.028. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.04.028
Söderman P, Malchau H, Herberts P, Johnell O. Are the findings in the Swedish National Total Hip Arthroplasty Register valid? J Arthroplasty 2000; 15(7): 884-9. doi: 10.1054/arth.2000.8591. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2000.8591
Helse Bergen H F. Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Arthroplasty and Hip Fractures, 2023. Available at: https://helse-bergen.no/nrl
Turppo V, Sund R, Sirola J, Kröger H, Huopio J. Cross-validation of arthroplasty records between arthroplasty and hospital discharge registers, self-reports, and medical records among a cohort of 14,220 women. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(12): 3649-54. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.08.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.08.010
Canadian Institute for Health Information. Data quality documentation for users: Canadian Joint Replacement Registry, 2020–2021 data. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2022.
Wagner M, Neururer S, Dammerer D, Nardelli P, Kaufmann G, Braito M, et al. External validation of the Tyrolean hip arthroplasty registry. J Exp Orthop 2022; 9(1): 87. doi: 10.1186/s40634-022-00526-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40634-022-00526-3
Rizzoli Orthopedic Institute. Regional Register of Orthopaedic Prosthetic Implantology Overall data hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty in Emilia-Romagna region (Italy) 2000–2021. Bologna; 2024.
Pedersen A B, Johnsen S P, Overgaard S, Søballe K, Sørensen H T, Lucht U. Registration in the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry: completeness of total hip arthroplasties and positive predictive value of registered diagnosis and postoperative complications. Acta Orthop 2004; 4(75): 434-41. doi: 10.1080/00016470410001213-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00016470410001213-1
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Colton Poitras, Christiaan H Righolt, Eric R Bohm
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PlumX (by Elsevier) is an altmetrics platform that tracks and visualizes the online attention, usage, captures, citations, and social media engagement.
