title: International importance of robust breast device registries.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Breast implants are high-risk devices that have been at the epicenter of much debate and controversy. In light of the Poly Implant Prothèse crisis, data registries among 11 national societies around the world are cooperatively calling for the urgent need to establish robust national clinical quality registries based on international best practice within a framework of international collaboration.
  
  
  METHODS
  A survey was conducted on the historic and current status of national breast device registries. Eleven countries participated in the study, illustrating different data collection systems and registries around the world. Data collection was designed to illustrate the capabilities of current national registries, with particular focus on capture rate and outcome reporting mechanisms.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A study of national breast implant registries revealed that less than half of the participating countries had operational registries and that none of these had adequately high data capture to enable reliable outcome analysis. The study revealed that the two most common problems that discouraged participation are the complexity of data sets and the opt-in consent model.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Recent implant crises have highlighted the need for robust registries. This article argues the importance of securing at least 90 percent data capture, which is achievable through the opt-out consent model. Since adopting this model, the Australian Breast Device Registry has increased data capture from 4 percent to over 97 percent. Simultaneously, it is important to foster international collaboration from the outset to avoid duplication of efforts and enable the development of effective international early warning systems.
authors: Adelaide, Australia; Cape Town, South Africa; Dublin, Ireland; Orange County, Calif.; Berlin, Germany; Graz, Austria; Paris, France; Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Melbourne, Australia; London and Nottingham, United Kingdom; Saltsjöbaden, Sweden; Tel-Aviv, Israel; Temple, Texas; and Auckland, New Zealand From the Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons of Southern Africa; the Irish Society of Plastic Surgeons; the American Society of Plastic Surgeons; the German Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons; the Austrian Society for Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery; the French Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons; the Dutch Society of Plastic Surgeons; the Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University; the Breast Implant Registry Pilot, Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency; the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons; the Swedish Association of Plastic Surgeons; the International Breast Implant Registry; the American Plastic Surgery Foundation; and the New Zealand Association of Plastic Surgeons.
authors: Rodney D
authors: RD
authors: Cooter
authors: Shane
authors: S
authors: Barker
authors: Sean M
authors: SM
authors: Carroll
authors: Gregory R D
authors: GRD
authors: Evans
authors: Uwe
authors: U
authors: von Fritschen
authors: Helmut
authors: H
authors: Hoflehner
authors: Claude
authors: C
authors: Le Louarn
authors: David B
authors: DB
authors: Lumenta
authors: Irene M J
authors: IMJ
authors: Mathijssen
authors: John
authors: J
authors: McNeil
authors: Stephen
authors: S
authors: Mulgrew
authors: Marc A M
authors: MAM
authors: Mureau
authors: Graeme
authors: G
authors: Perks
authors: Hinne
authors: H
authors: Rakhorst
authors: Charles
authors: C
authors: Randquist
authors: Moris
authors: M
authors: Topaz
authors: Charles
authors: C
authors: Verheyden
authors: John
authors: J
authors: de Waal
mesh_terms: D019985:Benchmarking; D018427:Breast Implants / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D033181:Information Dissemination; D007258:Informed Consent; D007391:International Cooperation; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D012042:Registries / Q000706:statistics & numerical data
references: McLaughlin JK, Lipworth L, Murphy DK, Walker PS. The safety of silicone gel-filled breast implants: A review of the epidemiologic evidence. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:569–580
references: Jeeves AE, Cooter RD. Transforming Australia’s Breast Implant Registry. Med J Aust. 2012;196:232–234
references: Kmietowicz Z. PIP implants don’t pose risk to health, expert group concludes. BMJ. 2012;344:e4234
references: Tu JV, Willison DJ, Silver FL, et al.Investigators in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. Impracticability of informed consent in the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1414–1421
references: James S, Daubert JC, Van de Werf F. Commentary: Use of registries to investigate the past and develop the future. BMJ. 2011;342:d2826
references: Larsson S, Lawyer P, Garellick G, Lindahl B, Lundström M. Use of 13 disease registries in 5 countries demonstrates the potential to use outcome data to improve health care’s value. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:220–227
references: Evans SM, Scott IA, Johnson NP, Cameron PA, McNeil JJ. Development of clinical-quality registries in Australia: The way forward. Med J Aust. 2011;194:360–363
references: Cohen D. Out of joint: The story of the ASR. BMJ. 2011;342:d2905