U M Modhia1, A J Dickens1, C D Glezos2, R J Gehlert1, T A DeCoster1. 1. University of New Mexico Department of Or thopaedics and Rehabilitation Albuquerque, NM. 2. Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine Richmond, VA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The OTA Fracture Classification is designed to provide a common language and facilitate effective communication among orthopaedic surgeons. We attempted to measure the degree to which this classification is currently being utilized in orthopaedic trauma literature. METHODS: We reviewed all of the articles in the JOT in 2011. We determined which of these articles could have appropriately utilized the 2007 OTA Classification. We calculated the percentage that mentioned and correctly cited this classification system as a reference. RESULTS: There were 145 articles in 2011. One hundred of these articles were appropriate for classifying a fracture. 38% of these articles utilized the OTA classification in the text. Only 42% of articles mentioning the OTA Classification cited a reference. 38% of these citations used the old (1996) OTA Classification reference, and only 8% overall correctly cited the 2007 OTA Classification reference. 51% of articles mentioned some other classification system; 21 in addition to OTA and 30 instead of the OTA classification. CONCLUSIONS: The OTA Fracture Classification is being used more commonly (38%) but is not routinely used or correctly cited (8%) in articles currently being published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, despite the fact that it is "required" according to the instructions to authors. We conclude that future authors should utilize and correctly reference the 2007 OTA Classification so that the benefits of a common language can be realized. Routine and consistent utilization of the classification may ultimately lead to more consistency and improved interpretability of treatment outcomes in published orthopaedic trauma research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-III case-control study, decision analysis.
BACKGROUND: The OTA Fracture Classification is designed to provide a common language and facilitate effective communication among orthopaedic surgeons. We attempted to measure the degree to which this classification is currently being utilized in orthopaedic trauma literature. METHODS: We reviewed all of the articles in the JOT in 2011. We determined which of these articles could have appropriately utilized the 2007 OTA Classification. We calculated the percentage that mentioned and correctly cited this classification system as a reference. RESULTS: There were 145 articles in 2011. One hundred of these articles were appropriate for classifying a fracture. 38% of these articles utilized the OTA classification in the text. Only 42% of articles mentioning the OTA Classification cited a reference. 38% of these citations used the old (1996) OTA Classification reference, and only 8% overall correctly cited the 2007 OTA Classification reference. 51% of articles mentioned some other classification system; 21 in addition to OTA and 30 instead of the OTA classification. CONCLUSIONS: The OTA Fracture Classification is being used more commonly (38%) but is not routinely used or correctly cited (8%) in articles currently being published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, despite the fact that it is "required" according to the instructions to authors. We conclude that future authors should utilize and correctly reference the 2007 OTA Classification so that the benefits of a common language can be realized. Routine and consistent utilization of the classification may ultimately lead to more consistency and improved interpretability of treatment outcomes in published orthopaedic trauma research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level-III case-control study, decision analysis.
Authors: Kenneth A Egol; Michael G Soojian; Michael Walsh; Jonathan Katz; Andrew D Rosenberg; Nader Paksima Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 2.512