• Injury · Jun 2022

    Reliability and reproducibility analysis of the AOSpine Sacral Fractures Classification System by spinal and pelvic surgeons.

    • P D Giorgi, E Gallazzi, F Bove, U Mezzadri, G Pesenti, G Sanchez-Rosemberg, S Legrenzi, and G R Schirò.
    • ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, U.O. Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Milano, Italy.
    • Injury. 2022 Jun 1; 53 (6): 2110-2113.

    Study DesignRetrospective Cohort Study OBJECTIVES: The AOSpine Sacral Classification System was proposed as a comprehensive and universally accepted new classification for Sacral Fractures, and was recently internally validated. However, an external, independent and multidisciplinary reports on validation of this classification is lacking. Aim of the present study is to analyze the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AOSpine Sacral Classification System for Sacral Fractures between orthopedic spinal and pelvic surgeons with different levels of experience.MethodsOur institutional database was searched to retrieve patients with acute, traumatic sacral injury admitted from June 2017 to June 2020. For each patients, X-Rays and CT scans were collected. Three Orthopedic Pelvic Surgeons (Group A) and three Spine Surgeons (Group B), with different level of experience (Junior, 〈 5 years; Middle, 5-10 years; Expert 〉 10 years) independently classified all the sacral fractures included in the dataset, with two separate evaluation three weeks apart. Both intra and interobserver reliability were calculated with k-coefficient.ResultsOverall, 150 patients were included in the final dataset, for a total of 1800 different assessments, with all the subtypes reported. The intraobserver reproducibility for the whole group was substantial (κ=0.72). Overall, the interobserver reliability was moderate, with a κ=0.57. When only fracture type was taken in account, the κ value became substantial (κ=0.62). No significant differences were found comparing group A and group B (0.55 vs κ 0.55, p>0.05). No significant differences according to surgeon's experience were found; however, the κ value was slightly lower among the junior surgeons.ConclusionsOur findings confirmed the reliability and reproducibility of this classification in clinical practice. In the current study the surgeon's expertise (pelvic and spinal trauma) and the level of experience does not influence the reliability of the classification system.Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.