The National Dutch Breast Implant Registry: user-reported experiences and importance

Claudia Antoinette Bargon, Babette E. Becherer, Danny Young-Afat, Annelotte C. M. van Bommel, Juliette Hommes, Marije J. Hoornweg, Ingrid Hopper, Marc A. M. Mureau, Hinne A. Rakhorst*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

3 Citations (Web of Science)


Background Robust (inter-)national breast implant registries are important. For some, registries are an administrative burden, for others they represent a solution for the discussions involving breast implants. The DBIR is one of the first national, opt-out, clinical registries of breast implants, providing information for clinical auditing and product recall. Four years after its introduction, it is time to address users' comments in order to keep improving quality of registration, and patient safety. This study assesses users' feedback focusing on importance of registration, logistics and user experience, and areas of improvement. Methods In May 2018, a standardized online study-specific questionnaire was sent out to all members of the Netherlands Society of Plastic Surgery. Descriptive statistics were reported in absolute frequencies and/or percentages. Results A total of 102 members responded to the questionnaire (response rate, 24.2%). Of all respondents, 97.1% were actively registering in DBIR. Respondents rated the importance of registration in DBIR as 8.1 out of 10 points. Ninety-one respondents suggested improvements for the DBIR. All comments were related to registration convenience and provision of automatically generated data. Conclusions Respondents believe that registration is highly important and worth the administrative burden. However, we should collectively keep improving accuracy, usability and sustainability of breast implant registries. The primary focus should be on the user interface; on user friendliness, automation, and data reusability. These users' responses function as a new incentive and provide learning points that are easy to extrapolate to others who want to set up or improve breast implant registries. Level of evidence: Not ratable.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)751-766
Number of pages16
JournalEuropean Journal of Plastic Surgery
Issue number6
Early online date26 Jun 2020
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2020


  • Breast implants
  • Implant registry
  • Clinical auditing
  • Quality of care
  • ROAD

Cite this