MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4404510691 · doi:10.33137/cpoj.v7i2.44089

EVALUATION OF THE SWEDEAMP DATABASE: FOCUS ON COVERAGE AND AMPUTATION LEVEL RATES

2024· article· en· W4404510691 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Anton Johannesson, Reynir Scheving, Karolin Lindgren Westlund, Þór Friðriksson

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAmputationFocus (optics)DatabaseComputer scienceMedicineSurgeryPhysics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The National Board of Health and Welfare manages several national registers in Sweden. This includes the Swedish National Inpatient Register (IPR), covering all surgical operations, and SwedeAmp, focusing on outcomes after lower limb amputations (LLA). However, coverage rates of amputation levels between these registers have not been externally analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To compare SwedeAmp's coverage with IPR for LLA cases and to assess SwedeAmp's accuracy in capturing LLA data. The goal of this study was also to identify potential discrepancies and establish benchmarks for common amputation levels. METHODOLOGY: Data from both registers, covering the years 2018 to 2023, were compared regarding the amputation levels and patient demographics. The coverage rate of the SwedeAmp register was calculated using SwedeAmp data as the numerator and IPR data as the denominator. FINDINGS: The IPR registry recorded 10,788 LLAs across 21 regions (67 hospitals). The SwedeAmp documented 5,246 LLAs covering 17 regions (36 hospitals), leaving 5,542 amputations unaccounted for, mainly due to regions or hospitals not participating in the SwedeAmp registry and lower registration rates in some areas. Key findings include: Achieving full coverage in SwedeAmp (17 regions) would require registering 9,305 LLAs. Both men and women over 85 years were significantly underrepresented. Thirteen regions in SwedeAmp obtained more than 40% coverage rate. 5 regions had more than 50% rate of above-knee amputations (range: 50.9% - 68.2%). 8 regions reporting more than 50% rate of below-knee amputations (range: 53.1% - 88.9%). Among the 67 hospitals performing LLAs, 36 reported to SwedeAmp. Six of these hospitals performed fewer than 10 LLAs over a six-year period. CONCLUSION: SwedeAmp captured 48.6% of initial LLAs in Sweden, highlighting the need for improved data completeness in LLA records, especially as only 13 regions achieved over 40% Coverage. For hospitals performing regular amputation, the proposed benchmark - coverage of ≥60%, with ≤36.3% for transfemoral amputation (TF), ≤8.4% for knee disarticulations (KD), and ≥55.3% for transtibial amputations (TT) – could serve as a target to enhance consistency and accuracy in reporting. Expanding coverage can improve the register's utility in tracking outcomes, setting national standards, aiding research, and supporting clinical decision-making. Layman's Abstract The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare manages different health records, including the Swedish National Inpatient Register (IPR), which tracks all surgeries, and SwedeAmp, which focuses on people who have had lower limb amputations. This study looked at how much of SwedeAmp’s data matches the IPR, aimed to identify differences and set standards for common types of amputations. We compared the levels of amputation and patient details between the two records to better understand their coverage. The IPR registered 10,788 lower limb amputations (LLAs) across 21 regions and 67 hospitals, while SwedeAmp reported 5,246 LLAs from 17 regions (36 hospitals), leaving 5,542 amputations unaccounted for. To achieve full coverage in SwedeAmp, 9,305 LLAs would need to be registered, representing 86.3% of all amputations in Sweden. Fewer men over 80 years and women over 85 years were included in the SwedeAmp registry compared to the IPR. Thirteen regions in SwedeAmp had a coverage rate of more than 40%. Five regions reported an above-knee amputation rate of over 50%, while eight regions had a below-knee amputation rate exceeding 50%. Among the 67 hospitals performing LLAs, 36 reported data to SwedeAmp. Six of these hospitals performed fewer than 10 LLAs over a six-year period. For hospitals performing regular amputations, a benchmark of ≥60% coverage, with ≤36.3% for transfemoral, ≤8.4% for knee disarticulations, and ≥55.3% for transtibial amputations, could improve consistency in reporting. Increasing SwedeAmp's participation would strengthen the reliability of national data, supporting better outcome tracking, research, and clinical standards. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/44089/33369 How To Cite: Johannesson A.G, Scheving R, Westlund k.L, Fridriksson T. Evaluation of the SwedeAmp database: Focus on coverage and amputation level rates. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2024; Volume 7, Issue 2, No.2. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v7i2.44089 Corresponding Author: Anton G. Johannesson, PhD, CPOÖssur Clinics EMEA, Stockholm, Sweden.E-Mail: ajohannesson@ossur.comORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8729-458X

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,878
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,345

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,052
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics JournalMême sujetDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementTravaux en français237 207