OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO/ASIF and Rüedi and Allgöwer classifications for fractures of the distal tibia, and to determine the benefit of a computed tomography (CT) scan and experience on observer agreement for several fracture characteristics, including classification. METHODS: The radiographs of forty-three fractures of the distal tibia, fourteen of which had CT scans, were assessed by groups of experienced and less-experienced observers. Each case was classified according to the AO/ASIF and Rüedi and Allgöwer systems. Several other fracture characteristics also were assessed. The kappa coefficient of agreement was calculated and used to compare the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the classification systems and to determine the benefit of experience and CT scans. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess noncategoric data. RESULTS: Interobserver and intraobserver agreements were good when classifying fractures into AO/ASIF types and significantly better than that for the Rüedi and Allgöwer system. However, agreement was poor when classifying the fractures into AO/ASIF groups. For most assessments, the experienced group tended to have higher levels of interobserver agreement, but not intraobserver agreement. Viewing the CT scans improved agreement on the percentage of articular surface involved, but it did not improve interobserver reliability or intraobserver reproducibility for either of the classification systems. CONCLUSION: The AO/ASIF classification for fractures of the distal tibia has good observer agreement at the type level, but poor agreement at the group level. Experience tends to improve interobserver agreement, but not intraobserver agreement. Viewing CT scans does not improve agreement on classification, but it tends to improve agreement on articular surface involvement.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO/ASIF and Rüedi and Allgöwer classifications for fractures of the distal tibia, and to determine the benefit of a computed tomography (CT) scan and experience on observer agreement for several fracture characteristics, including classification. METHODS: The radiographs of forty-three fractures of the distal tibia, fourteen of which had CT scans, were assessed by groups of experienced and less-experienced observers. Each case was classified according to the AO/ASIF and Rüedi and Allgöwer systems. Several other fracture characteristics also were assessed. The kappa coefficient of agreement was calculated and used to compare the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the classification systems and to determine the benefit of experience and CT scans. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess noncategoric data. RESULTS: Interobserver and intraobserver agreements were good when classifying fractures into AO/ASIF types and significantly better than that for the Rüedi and Allgöwer system. However, agreement was poor when classifying the fractures into AO/ASIF groups. For most assessments, the experienced group tended to have higher levels of interobserver agreement, but not intraobserver agreement. Viewing the CT scans improved agreement on the percentage of articular surface involved, but it did not improve interobserver reliability or intraobserver reproducibility for either of the classification systems. CONCLUSION: The AO/ASIF classification for fractures of the distal tibia has good observer agreement at the type level, but poor agreement at the group level. Experience tends to improve interobserver agreement, but not intraobserver agreement. Viewing CT scans does not improve agreement on classification, but it tends to improve agreement on articular surface involvement.
Authors: Fabio T Matsunaga; Marcel J S Tamaoki; Eduardo F Cordeiro; Anderson Uehara; Marcos H Ikawa; Marcelo H Matsumoto; João B G dos Santos; João C Belloti Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 2.362