20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Fracture and Dislocation Classification Compendium—2018

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          How reliable are reliability studies of fracture classifications? A systematic review of their methodologies.

          Two independent reviewers performed a search in MEDLINE and EMBASE for fracture classification reliability studies. Data were obtained on classifications, image modalities, fracture selection processes, sample sizes and their justification, type and number of raters, practical issues for the classification sessions, statistical methods, and results. A 10-item checklist was devised for quality assessment of methodologies. 44 studies assessing 32 fracture classification systems were included. We found a wide variation of methodologies. For instance, the median number of raters was 5 (2-36) and the median number of fractures was 50 (10-200). This selection was considered representative in 17/44 of the studies. The true distribution of classification categories was estimated in 9 studies. The kappa coefficient was mostly used (39/44) to quantify the raters' agreement. Methodological issues are discussed. Given limitations in the use and interpretation of kappa coefficients, investigators should consider alternative methods that focus upon the accuracy of the classification systems. The development and adoption of a systematic methodological approach to the development and validation of fracture classification systems is needed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The surgical algorithm for the AOSpine thoracolumbar spine injury classification system

            The goal of the current study is to establish a surgical algorithm to accompany the AOSpine thoracolumbar spine injury classification system.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Interobserver agreement in the classification of open fractures of the tibia. The results of a survey of two hundred and forty-five orthopaedic surgeons.

              The system of Gustilo and Anderson for the classification of open fractures is commonly used as a basis for treatment decisions and for comparison of the published results of treatment. The reliability of this classification system was tested on the basis of the responses of 245 orthopaedic surgeons to a survey. The respondents were asked to provide data about their age, type of practice, and type of training; the number of open fractures of the tibia that they treated each year; and their use of the Gustilo-Anderson classification system. They were also asked to classify twelve open fractures of the tibia on the basis of a series of videotaped case presentations. Each case presentation on the color videotape included demographic data on the patient, a history of the injury, the results of the physical examination, the appearance and dimensions of the open wound before the operation, preoperative radiographs, and selected portions of the operative débridement with narration. The level of agreement for the classification of each fracture was determined according to the largest percentage of observers who chose a single classification type. The average agreement among the observers for all twelve fractures was 60 percent. The over-all agreement for each fracture ranged from 42 to 94 percent. The average agreement in the subgroup of surgeons who were considered to have the least experience (residents and fellows) was 59 per cent (range, 33 to 94 percent).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
                Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0890-5339
                2018
                January 2018
                : 32
                : S1-S10
                Article
                10.1097/BOT.0000000000001063
                29256945
                c1b9ad7b-189c-40b4-afa8-54ca4a83ae92
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article