Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Dear Editor
We would like to thank Schiøtz et al. [1] for their interest in our editorial on the use of surgical databases in urogynaecology [2].
We are pleased to know that there is an established quality urogynaecology registry in Norway and that its use is compulsory. It is very encouraging to learn that the coverage rate is 98.5% and that it has achieved the highest possible quality rating in Norway. This should provide an excellent incentive to promote the use of surgical databases in our subspecialty.
Reference
Schiøtz HA, Svenningsen R, Kulseng-Hanssen S, Dimoski T. Re: Abdelrahman A, Moore A, Trochez R. Use of surgical databases in urogynaecology. Int Urogynecol J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04059-9.
Abdelrahman A, Moore A, Trochez R. Use of surgical databases in urogynaecology. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30:851–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-03943-8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Abdelrahman, A., Moore, A. & Trochez, R. Authors’ reply to letter from Schiøtz et al. on “Use of surgical databases in urogynaecology”. Int Urogynecol J 31, 849 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04101-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04101-w