Background: Since the start of the EndoCert Iniative in 2012, it is possible for clinics specialised in arthroplasty to become a certified endoprosthetic centre and a endoprosthetic centre of maximal care, respectively. This certification takes the fulfillment and audit of special requirements predifined by EndoCert as a basis. The major aim of EndoCert is to ensure an improvemtent and optimization in terms of quality and processes, accompanied by a complete documentation and data acquisition of activities undertaken. In a word, an augmentation of standardisation. <br />Since the year 2015, the General Hospital of Vienna (AKH Wien) is a certified endoprosthetic centre of maximal care. <br />Aim: Since the certification in 2015, data concerning hip and knee arthroplasty performed at the department of orthopaedics are collected in EndoDok the programm used for data acquisition by EndoCert. Simultaneously, the basically same data are also gathered in AKIM (AKH-Informations-Management) - the hospital information system of the AKH Vienna. Hence, the same data is gathered and withdrawable by two separate and independant systems. To reveal what or if benefits are brought along by the new system and its data acquisition, same as the depiction of potential differences in quality and possibility of data collection between EndoCert and AKIM, is the aim of this diploma thesis.<br />Design: Retrospective data analysis <br />Methods: Data from patients, who underwent a either hip or knee arthroplasty at the university clinic of othopaedics in the years 2015, 2016 and 2017 will be collected both using the OP-book of AKIM and EndoDok. Afterwards these patient data will be compared concerning potential discrepancy, to make a statement, which of these two data acquisition systems ensures a better collection of data as a marker of quality. Access to aforesaid data will be granted at the university clinic of orthopaedics. <br />Results: The comparision between the primary operated arthroplasties has shown, that the number of operated patients in EndoCert is not in full accordance with the one in AKIM but it is seen over the years that about 90 % the patients operated in each year are documented in both systems. Concearning operation times, similar results were found, but because of differing total numbers in each analysis, a comparison would not deliver a significant outcome. Regarding operation techniques it was found that EndoCert made a major improvement over the three years observed. While in 2015 99 % of operation techniques were not registered, this number decreased to 0 % in 2017. The reason for this amelioration is simple in 2015, the operation report did not include the opportunity of indicating the operation technique. Later on in 2016 this was changed by EndoCert. Another difference between EndoCert and AKIM is found regarding the acquisition of reasons leading to a revision surgery. In EndoCert, if a complication occurs and this complication is leading to revision surgery, the reason of this revision is known. If only the revision surgery is performed at the center, but the operation that lead to this revision was performed elsewhere, the reason leading to this revision is not known. In AKIM every revision surgery performed has a code that is standing for the diagnosis leading to a revision. <br />Discussion: Results of the data analysis concearning primary arthroplasty and operation time have shown that the quality of data acquisition can be considered as about equal. The comparision of operation techniques has, however, pointed out considerable differences. While a direct juxtaposition is difficult to perform because of differing nomenclature, it has been shown that data acquisition concearning operation techniques massively improved. The reason for this seeming amelioration is an improvement in the possibility of data gathering. EndoCert is a learning system that goes through improvement on aregular basis - deficiencies will be recognised and corrected.