• H S Chhabra, R Kaul, and V Kanagaraju.
• Department of Spine Service, Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India.
• Spinal Cord. 2015 Jan 1;53(1):42-8.

Study DesignOnline questionnaire survey.ObjectiveTo obtain the opinion of experts on whether the currently available classification systems for thoracolumbar and subaxial cervical spine injuries meet their expectations with regard to the desired objectives of a good classification system and practical implementability.MethodsAn online survey was conducted during August-September 2013 using a specially designed questionnaire. Members of Spine Trauma Study Group of International Spinal Cord Society and other spinal injury experts were approached, and responses were analyzed.ResultsForty-two spine experts responded. Majority (87.50%, n=35) were involved with education and research. For subaxial cervical spine injuries, Allen Ferguson classification was more commonly used (37.50%, n=15) and thought to be practically implementable in day-to-day practice (30.77%). For thoracolumbar injuries, while Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was more commonly used (47.50%, n=19), the response of experts for practical implementability in day-to-day practice was more evenly distributed among TLICS, AO (Association for Osteosynthesis) and Dennis classifications (30.77, 23.08 and 25.64%, respectively). Experts felt that the classification systems did not serve all the desired objectives. The reliability for residents was especially a concern.ConclusionWe may still be far from an ideal classification system. Many experts continue to prefer or would consider shifting back to traditional and simpler systems. There is a need for developing classification systems that would be better implementable practically in day-to-day clinical practice, better guide treatment, be more reliable, incorporate other modifiers influencing treatment and be more comprehensive in that order of priority.

14 keywords...

hide…