Literature DB >> 25399347

Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

M M Schneider1,2, M Balke3, P Koenen4, M Fröhlich4, A Wafaisade4, B Bouillon4, M Banerjee4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The reliability of the Rockwood classification, the gold standard for acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint separations, has not yet been tested. The purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability of visual and measured AC joint lesion grades according to the Rockwood classification.
METHODS: Four investigators (two shoulder specialists and two second-year residents) examined radiographs (bilateral panoramic stress and axial views) in 58 patients and graded the injury according to the Rockwood classification using the following sequence: (1) visual classification of the AC joint lesion, (2) digital measurement of the coracoclavicular distance (CCD) and the horizontal dislocation (HD) with Osirix Dicom Viewer (Pixmeo, Switzerland), (3) classification of the AC joint lesion according to the measurements and (4) repetition of (1) and (2) after repeated anonymization by an independent physician. Visual and measured Rockwood grades as well as the CCD and HD of every patient were documented, and a CC index was calculated (CCD injured/CCD healthy). All records were then used to evaluate intra- and interobserver reliability.
RESULTS: The disagreement between visual and measured diagnosis ranged from 6.9 to 27.6 %. Interobserver reliability for visual diagnosis was good (0.72-0.74) and excellent (0.85-0.93) for measured Rockwood grades. Intraobserver reliability was good to excellent (0.67-0.93) for visual diagnosis and excellent for measured diagnosis (0.90-0.97). The correlations between measurements of the axial view varied from 0.68 to 0.98 (good to excellent) for interobserver reliability and from 0.90 to 0.97 (excellent) for intraobserver reliability.
CONCLUSION: Bilateral panoramic stress and axial radiographs are reliable examinations for grading AC joint injuries according to Rockwood's classification. Clinicians of all experience levels can precisely classify AC joint lesions according to the Rockwood classification. We recommend to grade acute ACG lesions by performing a digital measurement instead of a sole visual diagnosis because of the higher intra- and interobserver reliability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case series, Level IV.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ac joint; Acromioclavicular joint; Acute; Dislocation; Intra- and interobserver reliability; Rockwood classification; Separation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25399347     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3436-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  17 in total

1.  Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint.

Authors:  O M ALEXANDER
Journal:  Radiography       Date:  1949-11

2.  Current state of treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries in Germany: is there a difference between specialists and non-specialists? A survey of German trauma and orthopaedic departments.

Authors:  Maurice Balke; Marco M Schneider; Sven Shafizadeh; Holger Bäthis; Bertil Bouillon; Marc Banerjee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  [Epidemiology, anatomy, biomechanics and imaging of acromioclavicular joint injuries].

Authors:  M Wellmann; T Smith
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  MRI versus radiography of acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Ursula Nemec; Gerhard Oberleitner; Stefan F Nemec; Michael Gruber; Michael Weber; Christian Czerny; Christian R Krestan
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint. An end-result study.

Authors:  T N Taft; F C Wilson; J W Oglesby
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the radiographic diagnosis and treatment of acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Matthew J Kraeutler; Gerald R Williams; Steven B Cohen; Michael G Ciccotti; Bradford S Tucker; Joshua S Dines; David W Altchek; Christopher C Dodson
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.390

7.  [Conservative or surgical therapy of acromioclavicular joint injury--what is reliable? A systematic analysis of the literature using "evidence-based medicine" criteria].

Authors:  H Bäthis; M Tingart; B Bouillon; T Tiling
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 0.955

8.  Fractures and ligamentous injuries of the clavicle and its articulation.

Authors:  F L Allman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1967-06       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Acromioclavicular separations: useful and practical classification for treatment.

Authors:  J D Tossy; N C Mead; H M Sigmond
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1963       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  Current concepts in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  Knut Beitzel; Mark P Cote; John Apostolakos; Olga Solovyova; Christopher H Judson; Connor G Ziegler; Cory M Edgar; Andreas B Imhoff; Robert A Arciero; Augustus D Mazzocca
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.772

View more
  5 in total

1.  Low prevalence of relevant associated articular lesions in patients with acute III-VI acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Authors:  Miguel Angel Ruiz Ibán; Juan Sarasquete; Mario Gil de Rozas; Pedro Costa; Juan Daniel Tovío; Eduardo Carpinteiro; Abdul Ilah Hachem; Manuel Perez España; Cristina Asenjo Gismero; Jorge Diaz Heredia; Miguel García Navlet
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  New quantitative radiographic parameters for vertical and horizontal instability in acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  Matthias A Zumstein; Philippe Schiessl; Benedikt Ambuehl; Lilianna Bolliger; Johannes Weihs; Martin H Maurer; Beat K Moor; Michael Schaer; Sumit Raniga
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Is coracoclavicular ossification a complication or a good prognostic factor after surgical treatment of acromioclavicular joint injury?

Authors:  Rodi Ertogrul; Koray Sahin; Haluk Celik; Mehmet Kapicioglu; Ali Ersen; Kerem Bilsel
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2022-05-19

4.  Hook plate fixation for acute acromioclavicular dislocations without coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction: a functional outcome study in military personnel.

Authors:  Narinder Kumar; Vyom Sharma
Journal:  Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr       Date:  2015-07-28

Review 5.  The acutely injured acromioclavicular joint - which imaging modalities should be used for accurate diagnosis? A systematic review.

Authors:  Jonas Pogorzelski; Knut Beitzel; Francesco Ranuccio; Klaus Wörtler; Andreas B Imhoff; Peter J Millett; Sepp Braun
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 2.362

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.