Suppr超能文献

用于髋关节翻修手术的骨量丢失分类系统的可靠性和有效性比较。

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

作者信息

Gozzard Charles, Blom Ashley, Taylor A, Smith Evert, Learmonth Ian

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

J Arthroplasty. 2003 Aug;18(5):638-42. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(03)00107-4.

Abstract

Three femoral (Paprosky, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons [AAOS], and Endo-Klinik) and 2 acetabular (Paprosky, AAOS) bone stock loss classification systems were evaluated for reliability. Four observers (2 consultants, 2 registrars) graded the bone loss in 25 patients using preoperative radiographs. Grading was repeated after a minimum of 2 weeks. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability was investigated. The kappa statistic was used to assess levels of agreement. Intraobserver agreement ranged from poor to good. Interobserver agreement ranged from fair to moderate. The validity of the Paprosky classification system was evaluated, comparing preoperative bone stock loss assessment with intraoperative findings. Agreement levels of moderate (femoral classification system) to good (acetabular classification system) were achieved. Bone stock loss classification systems are shown to be inconsistent and unreliable.

摘要

对三种股骨(帕罗斯基、美国骨科学会[AAOS]和恩多诊所)和两种髋臼(帕罗斯基、AAOS)骨量丢失分类系统的可靠性进行了评估。四名观察者(2名顾问、2名住院医生)使用术前X光片对25例患者的骨量丢失情况进行分级。至少2周后重复分级。研究了观察者间和观察者内的可靠性。kappa统计量用于评估一致性水平。观察者内一致性从差到好不等。观察者间一致性从中等到中等偏上不等。评估了帕罗斯基分类系统的有效性,将术前骨量丢失评估与术中发现进行比较。达到了中等(股骨分类系统)到良好(髋臼分类系统)的一致性水平。结果表明,骨量丢失分类系统不一致且不可靠。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验