Literature DB >> 30887120

Reliability of the commonly used classification systems for interprosthetic fractures.

Toby Jennison1, Abdulla Jawed2, Ahmed ElBakoury2, Hazem Hosny2, Rathan Yarlagadda2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: An interprosthetic fracture occurs between a hip and knee arthroplasty. There is currently no universally agreed classification. The aim of this study was to determine the interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the most commonly used interprosthetic fracture classifications.
METHODS: Nineteen interprosthetic fractures were classified by four reviewers for inter- and intraobserver reliability. The most commonly used interprosthetic fracture classifications were the Soenen classification, Platzer classification, and Pires classification. Cohen's kappa coefficient was calculated.
RESULTS: A moderate interobserver reliability was found for all the classification systems. The Platzer classification had a kappa value of 0.586, the Pires classification 0.499, and Soenen classification 0.489. The intraobserver error was 0.767 for the Platzer classification (substantial agreement), 0.636 for the Pires classification (substantial agreement), and 0.318 for the Soenen classification (fair agreement).
CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated moderate interobserver reliability and substantial intraobserver reliability for both the Platzer and Pires classifications. This paper would recommend the use of either classification for interprosthetic fractures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Interobserver error; Interprosthetic fracture; Intraobserver error; Pires classification; Platzer classification

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30887120     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-019-02393-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  12 in total

Review 1.  Management of periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty: a review.

Authors:  Matthew P Abdel; Umberto Cottino; Tad M Mabry
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Incidence and predisposing factors of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures: a literature review.

Authors:  Claudia C Sidler-Maier; James P Waddell
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Periprosthetic fractures of the femur associated with hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Bernd Fink; Martin Fuerst; Joachim Singer
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 4.  Interprosthetic femoral fractures-A challenge of treatment. A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  G Solarino; G Vicenti; L Moretti; A Abate; A Spinarelli; B Moretti
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 2.586

5.  Interprosthetic femoral fractures: analysis of 14 cases. Proposal for an additional grade in the Vancouver and SoFCOT classifications.

Authors:  M Soenen; H Migaud; F Bonnomet; J Girard; H Mathevon; M Ehlinger
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2011-10-06       Impact factor: 2.256

6.  Survivorship After Periprosthetic Femur Fracture: Factors Affecting Outcome.

Authors:  Jacob M Drew; William L Griffin; Susan M Odum; Bryce Van Doren; Brock T Weston; Louis S Stryker
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Management and outcome of interprosthetic femoral fractures.

Authors:  Patrick Platzer; Rupert Schuster; Monika Luxl; Harald Kurt Widhalm; Stefan Eipeldauer; Irena Krusche-Mandl; Roman Ostermann; Beate Blutsch; Vilmos Vécsei
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 8.  Interprosthetic femoral fractures: proposed new classification system and treatment algorithm.

Authors:  Robinson Esteves Santos Pires; Paulo Roberto Barbosa de Toledo Lourenço; Pedro José Labronici; Leonardo Rosa da Rocha; Daniel Balbachevsky; Francisco Ramiro Cavalcante; Marco Antônio Percope de Andrade
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.586

9.  Management of Interprosthetic Femur Fractures.

Authors:  John A Scolaro; Ran Schwarzkopf
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.020

10.  A comparison of the reliability and validity of bone stock loss classification systems used for revision hip surgery.

Authors:  Charles Gozzard; Ashley Blom; A Taylor; Evert Smith; Ian Learmonth
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  4 in total

1.  Methodological issue on reliability of the commonly used classification systems for interprosthetic fractures.

Authors:  Mehdi Naderi; Siamak Sabour
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-07-29

2.  Classifications in Brief: Pires Classification of Interprosthetic Femur Fractures.

Authors:  Rohan A Gheewala; Joseph R Young
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 4.755

3.  Revision rate is higher in patients with periprosthetic femur fractures following revision arthroplasty in comparison with ORIF following our algorithm: a two-center 1 analysis of 129 patients.

Authors:  Patrick Pflüger; Eftychios Bolierakis; Markus Wurm; Klemens Horst; Frank Hildebrand; Peter Biberthaler
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Balance training can enhance hip fracture patients' independence in activities of daily living: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xinxin Chen; Wenhui Yang; Xiao Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.817

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.