Accuracy and reliability of the AO/OTA classification for tibial shaft fractures

Rasmus Stokholm , Peter Larsen , Jan Duedal Rölfing , Marie Arildsen , Christian Grundtvig Rasmussen , Rasmus Elsoe
{"title":"Accuracy and reliability of the AO/OTA classification for tibial shaft fractures","authors":"Rasmus Stokholm ,&nbsp;Peter Larsen ,&nbsp;Jan Duedal Rölfing ,&nbsp;Marie Arildsen ,&nbsp;Christian Grundtvig Rasmussen ,&nbsp;Rasmus Elsoe","doi":"10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Available literature lacks information regarding the accuracy and reliability of the AO/OTA classification for tibial shaft fractures. This study aimed to assess the inter- and intra-observer agreement and accuracy of the AO/OTA 42 classification (4-signs) for adult patients with tibial shaft fractures.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>The study design is an accuracy, inter- and intra-observer agreement study. Anterior posterior (AP) and lateral X-rays of the fracture were used in the examination. The raters comprised of two junior doctors and two orthopedic trauma consultants, who underwent patient scoring twice in a blinded and randomized set-up. A committee including two consultant orthopedic trauma surgeons, one consultant orthopedic radiologist, and one associate professor was established to represent the “gold standard.” The 3- and 4-signs AO/OTA 42 classification was used for classification.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 101 patients were included. X-rays were available for all 101 patients. Based on the gold standard classification, AO/OTA 42-A1 (56 %) was the most common fracture type, followed by AO/OTA 42-A3 (14 %). The agreement at 4-signs, when comparing the four raters and the gold standard classification was between 75 % and 86 % (Choen's kappa 0.53 to 0.79). Choen's kappa coefficient at 4-sgns for intra-and inter-observer agreement was between 0.47 and 0.74 and 0.31 and 0.60, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study showed substantial to moderate accuracy of the 4-signs AO/OTA 42- classification for tibial shaft fractures. Intra-observation agreements at 4-signs showed moderate to substantial agreement with and without available CT scans. Inter-observer agreements at 4-signs showed moderate to substantial agreement with only X-rays available. Inter-observer agreements for CT scan at 4-signs showed slight to moderate agreements.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":53594,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma","volume":"59 ","pages":"Article 102826"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0976566224004958","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Available literature lacks information regarding the accuracy and reliability of the AO/OTA classification for tibial shaft fractures. This study aimed to assess the inter- and intra-observer agreement and accuracy of the AO/OTA 42 classification (4-signs) for adult patients with tibial shaft fractures.

Materials and methods

The study design is an accuracy, inter- and intra-observer agreement study. Anterior posterior (AP) and lateral X-rays of the fracture were used in the examination. The raters comprised of two junior doctors and two orthopedic trauma consultants, who underwent patient scoring twice in a blinded and randomized set-up. A committee including two consultant orthopedic trauma surgeons, one consultant orthopedic radiologist, and one associate professor was established to represent the “gold standard.” The 3- and 4-signs AO/OTA 42 classification was used for classification.

Results

A total of 101 patients were included. X-rays were available for all 101 patients. Based on the gold standard classification, AO/OTA 42-A1 (56 %) was the most common fracture type, followed by AO/OTA 42-A3 (14 %). The agreement at 4-signs, when comparing the four raters and the gold standard classification was between 75 % and 86 % (Choen's kappa 0.53 to 0.79). Choen's kappa coefficient at 4-sgns for intra-and inter-observer agreement was between 0.47 and 0.74 and 0.31 and 0.60, respectively.

Conclusion

This study showed substantial to moderate accuracy of the 4-signs AO/OTA 42- classification for tibial shaft fractures. Intra-observation agreements at 4-signs showed moderate to substantial agreement with and without available CT scans. Inter-observer agreements at 4-signs showed moderate to substantial agreement with only X-rays available. Inter-observer agreements for CT scan at 4-signs showed slight to moderate agreements.
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
胫骨轴骨折 AO/OTA 分类的准确性和可靠性
背景现有文献缺乏有关胫骨轴骨折 AO/OTA 分类准确性和可靠性的信息。本研究旨在评估成年胫骨轴骨折患者的 AO/OTA 42 分类(4-标志)的观察者之间和观察者内部的一致性和准确性。在检查中使用了骨折的前后位(AP)和侧位 X 光片。评分者包括两名初级医生和两名创伤骨科顾问,他们在盲法和随机设置的情况下对患者进行了两次评分。成立了一个委员会,其中包括两名创伤骨科顾问医生、一名骨科放射顾问医生和一名副教授,以代表 "金标准"。结果 共有 101 名患者被纳入其中。所有 101 名患者都有 X 光片。根据金标准分类,最常见的骨折类型是 AO/OTA 42-A1(56%),其次是 AO/OTA 42-A3(14%)。在比较四位评分者和金标准分类时,四次评分的一致性在 75% 到 86% 之间(Choen's kappa 0.53 到 0.79)。观察者内部和观察者之间在 4 次评分时的 Choen's kappa 系数分别为 0.47 至 0.74 和 0.31 至 0.60。在有CT扫描和没有CT扫描的情况下,4-signs的观察内一致性显示为中度到高度一致。在只有 X 光片的情况下,4-signs 的观察者之间的一致性为中等至基本一致。CT扫描的4点观察值的观察者间一致性为轻微至中等。
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
Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma
Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
92 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma (JCOT) aims to provide its readers with the latest clinical and basic research, and informed opinions that shape today''s orthopedic practice, thereby providing an opportunity to practice evidence-based medicine. With contributions from leading clinicians and researchers around the world, we aim to be the premier journal providing an international perspective advancing knowledge of the musculoskeletal system. JCOT publishes content of value to both general orthopedic practitioners and specialists on all aspects of musculoskeletal research, diagnoses, and treatment. We accept following types of articles: • Original articles focusing on current clinical issues. • Review articles with learning value for professionals as well as students. • Research articles providing the latest in basic biological or engineering research on musculoskeletal diseases. • Regular columns by experts discussing issues affecting the field of orthopedics. • "Symposia" devoted to a single topic offering the general reader an overview of a field, but providing the specialist current in-depth information. • Video of any orthopedic surgery which is innovative and adds to present concepts. • Articles emphasizing or demonstrating a new clinical sign in the art of patient examination is also considered for publication. Contributions from anywhere in the world are welcome and considered on their merits.
期刊最新文献
Biologic Augmented Scaffold-based cartilage repair: Addressing Complications and Enhancing Outcomes. Managing the arthritic wrist: Complication prevention and management. Challenges and complications in arthroscopic ankle ligament repair: Current concepts. AI in scientific publishing: Revolutionizing research with caution. Letter to editor: Sathyendra et al. Comparative study of local injections of autologous platelet rich plasma versus corticosteroid in management of chronic plantar fasciitis.
×
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