LEVENT KÜÇÜK, Mert KUMBARACI, Hüseyi̇n GÜNAY, Levent KARAPINAR, Oğuz ÖZDEMİR

Reliability and reproducibility of classifications for distal radius fractures

Amaç: Çalışmamızın amacı distal radius kırıklarınında Universal, AO, Fernandez ve Frykman sınıflamalarının değerlendiriciler arası güvenilirlik ve değerlendirici içi tekrar edilebilirlik özelliklerini değerlendirmekti. Çalışma planı: El bileğinde yer değiştirmiş kırığı olan 50 hastanın standart posteroanterior ve lateral grafileri 2 grup değerlendirici tarafından 2 ay zaman aralığıyla ikişer kez değerlendirildi. Birinci grup en az 5 yıllık tecrübeye sahip 10 ortopedi cerrahından, ikinci grup ise uzmanlık eğitiminin ilk 2 yılı içerisinde olan 10 ortopedi asistanından oluşmaktaydı. Değerlendiricilerin kendi içindeki ve değerlendiriciler arasındaki uyumu Cohen’in kappa testi ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Güvenilirlik açısından hiçbir sınıflama sistemi iyi – çok iyi seviyesine ulaşamadı. Fernandez sınıflamasında orta diğer sınıflamalarda ise düşük düzeyde değerlendiriciler arası uyum mevcuttu. Frykman ve Fernandez sınıflamalarında diğerlerine göre daha iyi sonuçlar alınmış olsa da, tüm sınıflamaların tekrar edilebilirliği düşük seviyede kaldı. Çıkarımlar: AO, Frykman, Fernandez ve Universal sınıflama sistemlerinin güvenilirlik ve tekrar edilebilirlik özellikleri açısından birbirlerine belirgin üstünlükleri yoktur. Dört sınıflamanın da güvenilirlik ve tekrar edilebilirlik oranları yetersizdir.

Distal radius kırıklarında kullanılan sınıflamaların güvenilirlik ve tekrar edilebilirlikleri

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the Universal, AO, Fernandez and Frykman classifications for distal radius fractures. Methods: Fifty standard sets of posteroanterior and lateral roentgenograms of displaced distal radius fractures were classified two times by two groups of evaluators at 2-month intervals. The first group consisted of 10 orthopedic surgeons with a minimum of 5 years of experience. The second group consisted of 10 orthopedic residents in their first two years of practice. Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility were assessed using Cohen’s kappa test. Results: None of the classifications achieved good – very good reliability levels. The Fernandez classification had a moderate and the others had a fair interobserver agreement kappa coefficient. All classifications had fair kappa intraobserver agreement although the Frykman and Fernandez classifications had better results. Conclusion: None of the classification systems were superior in terms of reliability and reproducibility. The reliability and reproducibility rates of all four classifications were insufficient.

___

1. Lill CA, Goldhahn J, Albrecht A, Eckstein F, Gatzka C, Schneider E. Impact of bone density on distal radius fracture patterns and comparison between five different fracture clas- sifications. J Orthop Trauma 2003;17:271-8.
2. Mackenney PJ, McQueen MM, Elton R. Prediction of insta- bility in distal radius fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;88:1944-51.
3. Fernandez DL. Distal radius fracture: the rationale of a clas- sification. Chir Main 2001;20:411-25.
4. Oskam J, Kingma J, Klasen HJ. Clinicians’ recognition of 10 different types of distal radial fractures. Percept Mot Skills 2000;91:917-24.
5. Kettler M, Kuhn V, Schieker M, Melone CP. Do we need to include osteoporosis in today’s classification of distal radius fractures? J Orthop Trauma 2008;22:S79-82.
6. Kiliç A, Kabukçuo¤lu Y, Ozkaya U, Gül M, Sökücü S, Ozdoğan U. Volar locking plate fixation of unstable distal radius fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2009;43:303- 8.
7. Sügün TS, Gürbüz Y, Ozaksar K, Toros T, Kayalar M, Bal E. Results of volar locking plating for unstable distal radius fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2012;46:22-5.
8. Gereli A, Nalbanto¤lu U, Kocao¤lu B, Türkmen M. Comparison of palmar locking plate and K-wire augmented external fixation for intra-articular and comminuted distal radius fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2010;44:212- 9.
9. Audigé L, Bhandari M, Hanson B, Kellam J. A concept for the validation of fracture classifications. J Orthop Trauma 2005;19:401-6.
10. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agree- ment for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74
11. Frykman G. Fracture of the distal radius including sequelae – shoulder-hand-finger syndrome, disturbance in the distal radio-ulnar joint and impairment of nerve function. A clini- cal and experimental study. Acta Orthop Scand 1967;Suppl 108:3+.
12. Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, Schatzker J. The compre- hensive classification of fractures of long bones. New York: Springer; 1990. p. 54-63.
13. Fernandez DL, Jupiter JB. Fractures of the distal radius. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 1995.
14. Fernandez DL. Treatment of articular fractures of the distal radius with external fixation and pinning. In: Saffar P, Cooney WP, editors. Fractures of the Distal Radius. London: Martin Dunitz Ltd; 1995. p. 104-17.
15. Cooney WP. Fracture of the distal radius. A modern treat- ment-based classification. Orthop Clin North Am 1993;24:211-6.
16. Kural C, Sungur I, Kaya I, Ugras A, Ertürk A, Cetinus E. Evaluation of the reliability of classification systems used for distal radius fractures. Orthopedics 2010;33:801.
17. Kreder HJ, Hanel DP, McKee M, Jupiter J, McGillivary G, Swiontkowski MF. Consistency of AO fracture classification for the distal radius. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:726-31.
18. Belloti JC, Tamaoki MJ, Franciozi CE, Santos JB, Balbachevsky D, Chap Chap E, et al. Are distal radius frac- ture classifications reproducible? Intra and interobserver agreement. Sao Paulo Med J 2008;126:180-5.
19. Naqvi SG, Reynolds T, Kitsis C. Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the Fernandez classifica- tion for distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2009;34:483-5.
20. MacDermid JC, Richards RS, Donner A, Bellamy N, Roth JH, Hildebrand KA. Reliability of hand fellows’ measure- ments and classifications from radiographs of distal radius fractures. Can J Plast Surg 2001;9:51-8.
21. Illarramendi A, González Della Valle A, Segal E, De Carli P, Maignon G, Gallucci G. Evaluation of simplified Frykman and AO classifications of fractures of the distal radius. Assessment of interobserver and intraobserver agreement. Int Orthop 1998;22:111-5.
22. Ploegmakers JJ, Mader K, Pennig D, Verheyen CC. Four distal radial fracture classification systems tested amongst a large panel of Dutch trauma surgeons. Injury 2007;38:1268- 72.
23. Andersen DJ, Blair WF, Steyers CM Jr, Adams BD, el- Khouri GY, Brandser EA. Classification of distal radius fractures: an analysis of interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. J Hand Surg Am 1996;21: 574-82.
24. Flikkilä T, Nikkola-Sihto A, Kaarela O, Pääkkö E, Raatikainen T. Poor interobserver reliability of AO classifi- cation of fractures of the distal radius. Additional computed tomography is of minor value. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80: 670-2.