Intrarater and Inter-rater Reliability of Tibial Plateau Fracture Classifications: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
JBJS Open Access Pub Date : 2024-10-03 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00181
Fardis Vosoughi, Iman Menbari Oskouie, Nazanin Rahimdoost, Amir Kasaeian, Arash Sherafat Vaziri
{"title":"Intrarater and Inter-rater Reliability of Tibial Plateau Fracture Classifications: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Fardis Vosoughi, Iman Menbari Oskouie, Nazanin Rahimdoost, Amir Kasaeian, Arash Sherafat Vaziri","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The interobserver and intraobserver reliability of various tibial plateau fracture (TPF) classifications has been examined in recent literature using radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. The question remains as to which classification system provides the highest reliability. In this systematic review, we are going to evaluate the overall interobserver and intraobserver reliability of various TPF classifications in different imaging modalities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In February 2023, predefined terms were used for database search (Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science). Meta-analysis of intrarater and inter-rater kappa coefficients was performed for each of the classifications in each modality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-four studies were included in this review. Schatzker's classification was more frequently used than others. It had a better intrarater kappa coefficient than the Hohl and Moore and Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classifications in radiography (κ = 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67-0.76, p < 0.01). The Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications had similar inter-rater reliability in the radiography modality (κ = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.54, p < 0.01; κ = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.5-0.55, p < 0.01; respectively). In 3-dimensional computed tomography, the Luo classification system showed the highest intrarater (κ = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.35-0.66) and inter-rater (κ = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.73-0.81) kappa coefficients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Three-column classification proposed by Luo et al. was able to reach the highest degree and was the only classification with near-excellent inter-rater reliability.</p>","PeriodicalId":36492,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Open Access","volume":"9 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11444555/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Open Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The interobserver and intraobserver reliability of various tibial plateau fracture (TPF) classifications has been examined in recent literature using radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. The question remains as to which classification system provides the highest reliability. In this systematic review, we are going to evaluate the overall interobserver and intraobserver reliability of various TPF classifications in different imaging modalities.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In February 2023, predefined terms were used for database search (Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science). Meta-analysis of intrarater and inter-rater kappa coefficients was performed for each of the classifications in each modality.

Results: Thirty-four studies were included in this review. Schatzker's classification was more frequently used than others. It had a better intrarater kappa coefficient than the Hohl and Moore and Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classifications in radiography (κ = 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67-0.76, p < 0.01). The Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications had similar inter-rater reliability in the radiography modality (κ = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.54, p < 0.01; κ = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.5-0.55, p < 0.01; respectively). In 3-dimensional computed tomography, the Luo classification system showed the highest intrarater (κ = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.35-0.66) and inter-rater (κ = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.73-0.81) kappa coefficients.

Conclusion: Three-column classification proposed by Luo et al. was able to reach the highest degree and was the only classification with near-excellent inter-rater reliability.

胫骨平台骨折分类的评分者内部和评分者之间的可靠性:系统回顾与元分析。
背景:最近有文献利用射线照相术、计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像对各种胫骨平台骨折(TPF)分类的观察者间和观察者内可靠性进行了研究。问题在于哪种分类系统的可靠性最高。在这篇系统性综述中,我们将评估不同成像模式下各种 TPF 分类的总体观察者间和观察者内可靠性:我们按照《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南进行了系统综述。2023 年 2 月,我们使用预先定义的术语进行数据库检索(Embase、PubMed、Scopus、Cochrane 和 Web of Science)。对每种方式的每种分类进行了评分者内部和评分者之间卡帕系数的元分析:本综述共纳入 34 项研究。Schatzker分类法比其他分类法更常用。与 Hohl 和 Moore 以及 Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 的放射摄影分类相比,Schatzker 的内部卡方系数更高(κ = 0.72,95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.67-0.76,p < 0.01)。在放射成像模式中,Schatzker 和 AO/OTA 分类的评分者间可靠性相似(κ = 0.53,95% CI = 0.51-0.54,p < 0.01;κ = 0.53,95% CI = 0.5-0.55,p < 0.01;分别如此)。在三维计算机断层扫描中,罗氏分类系统显示出最高的评分者内部(κ = 0.85,95% CI = 0.35-0.66)和评分者之间(κ = 0.77,95% CI = 0.73-0.81)卡帕系数:结论:Luo 等人提出的三栏分类法达到了最高水平,也是唯一一种评分者间可靠性接近优秀的分类法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JBJS Open Access
JBJS Open Access Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信