ASSESSMENT OF INTEROBSERVER RELIABILITY FOR THE LETOURNEL AND JUDET CLASSIFICATION.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Acta Ortopedica Brasileira Pub Date : 2024-03-22 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1413-785220243201e267640
Mehmet Yucens, Ahmet Nadir Aydemir, Ahmet Fahir Demirkan
{"title":"ASSESSMENT OF INTEROBSERVER RELIABILITY FOR THE LETOURNEL AND JUDET CLASSIFICATION.","authors":"Mehmet Yucens, Ahmet Nadir Aydemir, Ahmet Fahir Demirkan","doi":"10.1590/1413-785220243201e267640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Judet and Letournel classification is the most widely used classification system for acetabular fractures. Some complex fractures couldn't be classified according to this classification. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Letournel and Judet classification system for acetabular fractures.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>10 acetabular fractures were analyzed among 17 orthopedic surgeons. The surgeons were asked to classify the fractures according to the Judet and Letournel classification. Their experience, the number of surgeries, and the incision type that the surgeon uses for the anterior part of the acetabulum were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall interobserver agreement for the Letournel classification was found to be poor, with a Kappa value of 0.287. The Kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.224 for plain radiographs, 0.293 for 2D-CT, and 0.321 for 3D-CT scans. There was no significant difference between the incision types used by the surgeons. The highest reliability was determined among the surgeons who operate on 10-20 acetabular fractures per year, with a Kappa value of 0.309.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This results revealed that the Judet and Letournel Judet classification is not sufficient to classify acetabular fractures because of unclassified fractures and the complex algorithm of the system. <b><i>Level of Evidence III; Comparative Retrospective Study</i></b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":55563,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","volume":"32 1","pages":"e267640"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10962095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220243201e267640","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The Judet and Letournel classification is the most widely used classification system for acetabular fractures. Some complex fractures couldn't be classified according to this classification. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the Letournel and Judet classification system for acetabular fractures.

Material and methods: 10 acetabular fractures were analyzed among 17 orthopedic surgeons. The surgeons were asked to classify the fractures according to the Judet and Letournel classification. Their experience, the number of surgeries, and the incision type that the surgeon uses for the anterior part of the acetabulum were recorded.

Results: The overall interobserver agreement for the Letournel classification was found to be poor, with a Kappa value of 0.287. The Kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.224 for plain radiographs, 0.293 for 2D-CT, and 0.321 for 3D-CT scans. There was no significant difference between the incision types used by the surgeons. The highest reliability was determined among the surgeons who operate on 10-20 acetabular fractures per year, with a Kappa value of 0.309.

Conclusion: This results revealed that the Judet and Letournel Judet classification is not sufficient to classify acetabular fractures because of unclassified fractures and the complex algorithm of the system. Level of Evidence III; Comparative Retrospective Study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估 LETOURNEL 和 JUDET 分类法的观察者间可靠性。
简介Judet 和 Letournel 分类法是最广泛使用的髋臼骨折分类系统。一些复杂骨折无法按照该分类法进行分类。本研究的主要目的是评估 Letournel 和 Judet 分类系统对髋臼骨折的可靠性。要求外科医生根据 Judet 和 Letournel 分类法对骨折进行分类。他们的经验、手术次数以及外科医生在髋臼前部使用的切口类型都被记录在案:Letournel分类法的总体观察者间一致性较差,Kappa值为0.287。平片的观察者间一致性 Kappa 值为 0.224,2D-CT 为 0.293,3D-CT 扫描为 0.321。外科医生使用的切口类型之间没有明显差异。每年对 10-20 例髋臼骨折进行手术的外科医生的可靠性最高,Kappa 值为 0.309:这一结果表明,Judet 和 Letournel Judet 分类法不足以对髋臼骨折进行分类,因为存在未分类的骨折和该系统的复杂算法。证据等级 III;比较性回顾研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: A Revista Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, órgão oficial do Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (DOT/FMUSP), é publicada bimestralmente em seis edições ao ano (jan/fev, mar/abr, maio/jun, jul/ago, set/out e nov/dez) com versão em inglês disponível nos principais indexadores nacionais e internacionais e instituições de ensino do Brasil. Sendo hoje reconhecidamente uma importante contribuição para os especialistas da área com sua seriedade e árduo trabalho para as indexações já conquistadas.
期刊最新文献
OUTCOMES OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF DIAPHYSEAL FEMUR FRACTURES IN POLYTRAUMATIZED CHILDREN. COMBINED TECHNIQUES OF CAUDAL EPIDURAL BLOCK AND TRANSFORAMINAL NERVE ROOT BLOCK IN THE TREATMENT OF DEGENERATIVE DISEASES OF THE LUMBAR SPINE: A COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS. DECREASED SURGICAL DURATION, LESS COMPLICATIONS, AND FASTER RETURN TO ACTIVITIES ACROSS THE LEARNING CURVE FOR THE ARTHROSCOPIC LATARJET TECHNIQUE. EPIDEMIOLOGICAL PROFILE OF PATIENTS WITH TIBIA DIAPHYSIS FRACTURE TREATED AT A TERTIARY LEVEL HOSPITAL. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE IN ONCOLOGIC-ORTHOPEDIC STUDIES - ACTA ORTOP BRAS (1993-2022).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1