Professional experience and reliability of cervical vertebral maturation staging among unfamiliar raters.

IF 2.5 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Yiğit Umur Cırdı, Alp Er Tunga Bölükbaşı, Mehmet Oğuz Çolak, Enes Kanay, Danyal Gümüş, Mehmet Demirel, Okan Özkunt, Kerim Sarıyılmaz
{"title":"Professional experience and reliability of cervical vertebral maturation staging among unfamiliar raters.","authors":"Yiğit Umur Cırdı, Alp Er Tunga Bölükbaşı, Mehmet Oğuz Çolak, Enes Kanay, Danyal Gümüş, Mehmet Demirel, Okan Özkunt, Kerim Sarıyılmaz","doi":"10.52312/jdrs.2026.2784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the reliability of cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) staging in determining skeletal maturity in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), focusing on the effect of professional experience among orthopedic surgeons.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Between January 2023 and January 2025, this reliability and agreement study included a total of 72 patients aged between nine and 16 years who were diagnosed with AIS. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were analyzed using weighted kappa (κ) statistics with standard errors (SEs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 72 full-spine lateral radiographs were independently assessed by 10 raters with varying levels of orthopedic expertise, including medical students, residents, consultants, and spinal surgeons. None of the raters had prior experience with the CVM classification. Each rater performed CVM staging twice with a four-week interval between assessments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the patients, 33 were male and 39 were female with a mean age of 13.07 ± 1.97 (range, 9 to 16) years. Overall intra-rater reliability was substantial (κ = 0.64, SE = 0.032, 95% CI: 0.569-0.714), and overall inter-rater reliability was moderate (κ = 0.52). Although spinal surgeons showed slightly higher intra-rater reliability overall, inter-rater reliability declined between assessments (first assessment κ = 0.61 vs. second assessment κ = 0.34). Consultants exhibited the highest inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.62), whereas residents showed improvement between assessments (κ = 0.40 vs. 0.52); however, no significant difference observed between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The reliability of CVM staging for assessing skeletal maturity in AIS patients does not significantly differ across levels of orthopedic expertise. While CVM staging has potential as a radiation-sparing method, the overall moderate agreement, particularly among physicians without prior experience, indicates that reliability is not significantly influenced by professional experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":73560,"journal":{"name":"Joint diseases and related surgery","volume":"37 3","pages":"714-722"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joint diseases and related surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2026.2784","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the reliability of cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) staging in determining skeletal maturity in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), focusing on the effect of professional experience among orthopedic surgeons.

Patients and methods: Between January 2023 and January 2025, this reliability and agreement study included a total of 72 patients aged between nine and 16 years who were diagnosed with AIS. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were analyzed using weighted kappa (κ) statistics with standard errors (SEs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 72 full-spine lateral radiographs were independently assessed by 10 raters with varying levels of orthopedic expertise, including medical students, residents, consultants, and spinal surgeons. None of the raters had prior experience with the CVM classification. Each rater performed CVM staging twice with a four-week interval between assessments.

Results: Of the patients, 33 were male and 39 were female with a mean age of 13.07 ± 1.97 (range, 9 to 16) years. Overall intra-rater reliability was substantial (κ = 0.64, SE = 0.032, 95% CI: 0.569-0.714), and overall inter-rater reliability was moderate (κ = 0.52). Although spinal surgeons showed slightly higher intra-rater reliability overall, inter-rater reliability declined between assessments (first assessment κ = 0.61 vs. second assessment κ = 0.34). Consultants exhibited the highest inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.62), whereas residents showed improvement between assessments (κ = 0.40 vs. 0.52); however, no significant difference observed between groups.

Conclusion: The reliability of CVM staging for assessing skeletal maturity in AIS patients does not significantly differ across levels of orthopedic expertise. While CVM staging has potential as a radiation-sparing method, the overall moderate agreement, particularly among physicians without prior experience, indicates that reliability is not significantly influenced by professional experience.

不熟悉评分者的颈椎成熟分期的专业经验和可靠性。
目的:本研究旨在评估颈椎成熟(CVM)分期在确定青少年特发性脊柱侧凸(AIS)患者骨骼成熟度方面的可靠性,重点关注骨科医生专业经验的影响。患者和方法:在2023年1月至2025年1月期间,这项可靠性和一致性研究共纳入了72名年龄在9至16岁之间被诊断为AIS的患者。采用标准误差(SEs)和95%置信区间(CIs)加权kappa (κ)统计分析评分内和评分间信度。共有72张全脊柱侧位x线片由10位具有不同骨科专业水平的评分者独立评估,这些评分者包括医学生、住院医生、顾问和脊柱外科医生。所有评分者都没有CVM分类的经验。每个评分者进行两次CVM分期,评估间隔四周。结果:男性33例,女性39例,平均年龄13.07±1.97岁(9 ~ 16岁)。总体评分内信度显著(κ = 0.64, SE = 0.032, 95% CI: 0.569-0.714),总体评分间信度中等(κ = 0.52)。尽管脊柱外科医生总体上表现出更高的评分内信度,但评分间信度在评估之间下降(第一次评估κ = 0.61,第二次评估κ = 0.34)。咨询师表现出最高的评分一致性(κ = 0.62),而居民在评估之间表现出改善(κ = 0.40 vs. 0.52);但两组间无显著差异。结论:CVM分期评估AIS患者骨骼成熟度的可靠性在骨科专业水平上没有显著差异。虽然CVM分期有可能作为一种节省辐射的方法,但总体上的一致意见,特别是在没有经验的医生中,表明可靠性不受专业经验的显著影响。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书