Literature DB >> 28612191

Comparison of inter- and intra-observer reliability among the three classification systems for cervical spinal canal stenosis.

Sangbong Ko1, Wonkee Choi2, Seungbum Chae2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim is to analyze the agreement between different types of physicians in terms of the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability in addition to the agreement between the experienced and non-experienced physicians with respect to three different classification systems for diagnosis of cervical spinal canal stenosis.
METHODS: Total nine doctors including experienced group of three doctors and non-experienced group of six doctors classified the patients according to three different classification in an independent, blinded manner using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to diagnose cervical canal stenosis. MRI slice included sagittal plane (midline cut) and an image slice from each horizontal plane that penetrated the right center of each disk (C3-4, C4-5, C5-6, and C6-7) was made by PPT format.
RESULTS: For the inter-observer reliability, Vaccaro et al.'s classification system showed the excellent reproducibility, followed by Muhle et al. and Kang et al. All three classification systems showed excellent reproducibility and substantial agreement in terms of the intra-observer reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: All three classification systems showed excellent reproducibility and also displayed a substantial agreement. The classification system used by Vaccaro et al. was proven to be a method with substantial agreement both in the experienced group and the non-experienced group. It can be a useful classification system for simplifying communication among all physicians.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical spine; Classification; Reliability; Stenosis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28612191     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5187-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  23 in total

1.  Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: conservative versus surgical treatment after 10 years.

Authors:  Zdeněk Kadaňka; Josef Bednařík; Oldřich Novotný; Igor Urbánek; Ladislav Dušek
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Cervical Spine Stenosis Measures in Normal Subjects.

Authors:  Ryan T Tierney; Catherine Maldjian; Carl G Mattacola; Stephen J Straub; Michael R Sitler
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Prevalence of cervical spine stenosis. Anatomic study in cadavers.

Authors:  Michael J Lee; Ezequiel H Cassinelli; K Daniel Riew
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  New MRI grading system for the cervical canal stenosis.

Authors:  Yusuhn Kang; Joon Woo Lee; Young Hwan Koh; Saebeom Hur; Su Jin Kim; Jee Won Chai; Heung Sik Kang
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Narrow cervical canal in 1211 asymptomatic healthy subjects: the relationship with spinal cord compression on MRI.

Authors:  Hiroaki Nakashima; Yasutsugu Yukawa; Kota Suda; Masatsune Yamagata; Takayoshi Ueta; Fumihiko Kato
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Roentgenographic findings in the cervical spine in asymptomatic persons: a ten-year follow-up.

Authors:  D R Gore
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The relationship of developmental narrowing of the cervical spinal canal to reversible and irreversible injury of the cervical spinal cord in football players.

Authors:  J S Torg; R J Naranja; H Pavlov; B J Galinat; R Warren; R A Stine
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Classification system based on kinematic MR imaging in cervical spondylitic myelopathy.

Authors:  C Muhle; J Metzner; D Weinert; A Falliner; G Brinkmann; M H Mehdorn; M Heller; D Resnick
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Asymptomatic degenerative disk disease and spondylosis of the cervical spine: MR imaging.

Authors:  L M Teresi; R B Lufkin; M A Reicher; B J Moffit; F V Vinuela; G M Wilson; J R Bentson; W N Hanafee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  The developmental segmental sagittal diameter of the cervical spinal canal in patients with cervical spondylosis.

Authors:  W C Edwards; H LaRocca
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  2 in total

1.  Best cutoff score of cervical-pedicle thickness as a morphological parameter for predicting cervical central stenosis.

Authors:  Jungho Choi; Hyung-Bok Park; Taeha Lim; Shin Wook Yi; Sooho Lee; Sukhee Park; SoYoon Park; Jungmin Yi; Young Uk Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Degenerative findings on MRI of the cervical spine: an inter- and intra-rater reliability study.

Authors:  Line Thorndal Moll; Morten Wasmod Kindt; Christina Malmose Stapelfeldt; Tue Secher Jensen
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2018-10-16
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.