Proximal humeral fracture classification systems revisited

Hypothesis This study evaluated several classification systems and expert surgeons’ anatomic understanding of these complex injuries based on a consecutive series of patients. We hypothesized that current proximal humeral fracture classification systems, regardless of imaging methods, are not suffic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery Vol. 20; no. 7; pp. 1125 - 1132
Main Authors: Majed, Addie, MRCS, Macleod, Iain, FRCS(Orth), Bull, Anthony M.J., PhD, Zyto, Karol, MD, Resch, Herbert, MD, Hertel, Ralph, MD, Reilly, Peter, MD, FRCS(Orth), Emery, Roger J.H., MS, FRCS
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: New York, NY Mosby, Inc 01-10-2011
Elsevier
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Hypothesis This study evaluated several classification systems and expert surgeons’ anatomic understanding of these complex injuries based on a consecutive series of patients. We hypothesized that current proximal humeral fracture classification systems, regardless of imaging methods, are not sufficiently reliable to aid clinical management of these injuries. Materials and methods Complex fractures in 96 consecutive patients were investigated by generation of rapid sequence prototyping models from computed tomography Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) imaging data. Four independent senior observers were asked to classify each model using 4 classification systems: Neer, AO, Codman-Hertel, and a prototype classification system by Resch. Interobserver and intraobserver κ coefficient values were calculated for the overall classification system and for selected classification items. Results The κ coefficient values for the interobserver reliability were 0.33 for Neer, 0.11 for AO, 0.44 for Codman-Hertel, and 0.15 for Resch. Interobserver reliability κ coefficient values were 0.32 for the number of fragments and 0.30 for the anatomic segment involved using the Neer system, 0.30 for the AO type (A, B, C), and 0.53, 0.48, and 0.08 for the Resch impaction/distraction, varus/valgus and flexion/extension subgroups, respectively. Three-part fractures showed low reliability for the Neer and AO systems. Discussion Currently available evidence suggests facture classifications in use have poor intra- and inter-observer reliability despite the modality of imaging used thus making treating these injuries difficult as weak as affecting scientific research as well. This study was undertaken to evaluate the reliability of several systems using rapid sequence prototype models. Conclusion Overall interobserver κ values represented slight to moderate agreement. The most reliable interobserver scores were found with the Codman-Hertel classification, followed by elements of Resch’s trial system. The AO system had the lowest values. The higher interobserver reliability values for the Codman-Hertel system showed that is the only comprehensive fracture description studied, whereas the novel classification by Resch showed clear definition in respect to varus/valgus and impaction/distraction angulation.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1058-2746
1532-6500
DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.020