• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Inter- and intra-observer variation of the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications of tibial plateau fractures and a proposal of a new classification system.胫骨平台骨折的Schatzker和AO/OTA分类在观察者间及观察者内的差异以及一种新分类系统的提议
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007 May;89(4):400-4. doi: 10.1308/003588407X187667.
2
Classification systems for tibial plateau fractures; does computed tomography scanning improve their reliability?胫骨平台骨折分类系统;计算机断层扫描扫描能否提高其可靠性?
Injury. 2010 Feb;41(2):173-8. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2009.08.016. Epub 2009 Sep 9.
3
AO or Schatzker? How reliable is classification of tibial plateau fractures?AO分型还是Schatzker分型?胫骨平台骨折的分类有多可靠?
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003 Oct;123(8):396-8. doi: 10.1007/s00402-003-0573-1. Epub 2003 Aug 12.
4
A systematic literature review of tibial plateau fractures: What classifications are used and how reliable and useful are they?胫骨平台骨折的系统文献综述:使用了哪些分类方法,它们的可靠性和实用性如何?
Injury. 2018 Mar;49(3):473-490. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.01.025. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
5
Tibial plateau fractures: reproducibility of three classifications (Schatzker, AO, Duparc) and a revised Duparc classification.胫骨平台骨折:三种分类法(Schatzker、AO、Duparc)和改良 Duparc 分类的可重复性。
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013 Nov;99(7):805-16. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2013.06.007. Epub 2013 Oct 9.
6
The classification systems for tibial plateau fractures: how reliable are they?胫骨平台骨折的分类系统:它们的可靠性如何?
Injury. 2008 Oct;39(10):1216-21. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2008.01.023.
7
Reliability of a four-column classification for tibial plateau fractures.胫骨平台骨折四柱分类法的可靠性
Int Orthop. 2017 Sep;41(9):1881-1886. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3543-x. Epub 2017 Jul 7.
8
Intra- and inter-observer reliability assessment of widely used classifications and the "Ten-segment classification" of tibial plateau fractures.广泛使用的分类法和胫骨平台骨折的“十段分类法”的观察者内和观察者间可靠性评估。
Knee. 2022 Mar;35:149-156. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2022.03.002. Epub 2022 Mar 18.
9
WhatsApp Messenger is useful and reproducible in the assessment of tibial plateau fractures: inter- and intra-observer agreement study.WhatsApp Messenger在胫骨平台骨折评估中具有实用性和可重复性:观察者间和观察者内一致性研究。
Int J Med Inform. 2015 Feb;84(2):141-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.11.002. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
10
The AO classification system for tibial plateau fractures: An independent inter and intraobserver agreement study.AO 胫骨平台骨折分类系统:一项独立的组内和组间观察者一致性研究。
Injury. 2023 Nov;54 Suppl 6:110741. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2023.04.028.

引用本文的文献

1
Changes in inter observer variation of Schatzker and AO/OTA classification of tibial plateau fractures on addition of CT scan.添加CT扫描后,胫骨平台骨折Schatzker和AO/OTA分类观察者间差异的变化。
Int J Burns Trauma. 2025 Jun 15;15(3):125-132. doi: 10.62347/YNVJ5137. eCollection 2025.
2
Intrarater and Inter-rater Reliability of Tibial Plateau Fracture Classifications: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.胫骨平台骨折分类的评估者内和评估者间可靠性:系统评价与荟萃分析
JB JS Open Access. 2024 Oct 3;9(4). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00181. eCollection 2024 Oct-Dec.
3
Lack of standardisation in the management of complex tibial plateau fractures: a multicentre experience.复杂胫骨平台骨折治疗缺乏标准化:多中心经验
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Dec;50(6):2937-2945. doi: 10.1007/s00068-024-02616-6. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
4
Patient-Reported Outcomes following Tibial Plateau Fractures: Mid- to Short-Term Implications for Knee Function and Activity Level.胫骨平台骨折后的患者报告结局:对膝关节功能和活动水平的中短期影响
J Clin Med. 2024 Apr 17;13(8):2327. doi: 10.3390/jcm13082327.
5
Comparison between reliability of Schatzker's classification and CT based four quadrant classification for tibial plateau fractures.Schatzker分类法与基于CT的胫骨平台骨折四象限分类法可靠性的比较。
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2022 Aug 8;32:101986. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2022.101986. eCollection 2022 Sep.
6
The influence of 3D printing on inter- and intrarater reliability on the classification of tibial plateau fractures.3D 打印技术对胫骨平台骨折分类的组内和组间可靠性的影响。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2023 Feb;49(1):189-199. doi: 10.1007/s00068-022-02055-1. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
7
Evaluation of the Reproducibility of the Schatzker Classification Reviewed by Kfuri for Tibial Plateau Fractures.Kfuri对胫骨平台骨折的Schatzker分类可重复性的评估
Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2021 Aug 13;57(3):502-510. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1729577. eCollection 2022 Jun.
8
Is It Necessary To Add Soft Tissue Injury to the Classification in Tibial Plateau Fracture Management?在胫骨平台骨折治疗的分类中是否有必要增加软组织损伤这一因素?
Cureus. 2022 Feb 15;14(2):e22236. doi: 10.7759/cureus.22236. eCollection 2022 Feb.
9
Radiographic detection of lateral plateau involvement in medial tibial plateau fractures (AO/OTA 41-B1.2, 1.3, 3.2 and 3.3).X 线检测内侧胫骨平台骨折中(AO/OTA 41-B1.2、1.3、3.2 和 3.3)的外侧平台累及情况。
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022 Dec;32(8):1501-1508. doi: 10.1007/s00590-021-03117-7. Epub 2021 Sep 23.
10
The Tibial Plateau Map: Fracture Line Morphology of Intra-Articular Proximal Tibial Fractures.胫骨平台图谱:关节内胫骨近端骨折的骨折线形态。
Biomed Res Int. 2021 Aug 24;2021:9920189. doi: 10.1155/2021/9920189. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Radiographic fracture assessments: which ones can we reliably make?影像学骨折评估:哪些评估结果是我们能够可靠得出的?
J Orthop Trauma. 2000 Aug;14(6):379-85. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200008000-00001.
2
Impact of CT scan on treatment plan and fracture classification of tibial plateau fractures.CT扫描对胫骨平台骨折治疗方案及骨折分类的影响。
J Orthop Trauma. 1997 Oct;11(7):484-9. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199710000-00005.
3
MRI in the management of tibial plateau fractures.
Injury. 1995 Nov;26(9):595-9. doi: 10.1016/0020-1383(95)00109-m.
4
Reproducibility of histomorphologic diagnoses with special reference to the kappa statistic.组织形态学诊断的可重复性:特别提及kappa统计量
APMIS. 1989 Aug;97(8):689-98. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1989.tb00464.x.
5
The tibial plateau fracture. The Toronto experience 1968--1975.胫骨平台骨折。多伦多的经验(1968 - 1975年)
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jan-Feb(138):94-104.

胫骨平台骨折的Schatzker和AO/OTA分类在观察者间及观察者内的差异以及一种新分类系统的提议

Inter- and intra-observer variation of the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications of tibial plateau fractures and a proposal of a new classification system.

作者信息

Charalambous C P, Tryfonidis M, Alvi F, Moran M, Fang C, Samarji R, Hirst P

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK.

出版信息

Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007 May;89(4):400-4. doi: 10.1308/003588407X187667.

DOI:10.1308/003588407X187667
PMID:17535620
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1963574/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-observer variation of the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications in assessing tibial plateau fractures, using plain radiographs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty tibial plateau fractures were classified independently by six observers as per the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications, using antero-posterior and lateral plain radiographs. Assessment was done on two occasions, 8 weeks apart.

RESULTS

We found that both the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications have a high intra-observer (kappa = 0.57 and 0.53, respectively), and inter-observer (kappa = 0.41 and 0.43, respectively) variation. Classification of tibial plateau fractures into unicondylar versus bicondylar and pure splits versus articular depression +/- split conferred improved inter- and intra-observer variation.

CONCLUSIONS

The high inter-observer variation found for the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications must be taken into consideration when these are used as a guidance of treatment and when used in evaluating patients' outcome. Simply classifying tibial plateau fractures into unicondylar versus bicondylar and pure splits versus articular depression +/- split may be more reliable.

摘要

引言

本研究旨在利用X线平片评估Schatzker分类法和AO/OTA分类法在评估胫骨平台骨折时观察者内及观察者间的差异。

患者与方法

6名观察者根据Schatzker分类法和AO/OTA分类法,利用前后位和侧位X线平片对50例胫骨平台骨折进行独立分类。评估分两次进行,间隔8周。

结果

我们发现,Schatzker分类法和AO/OTA分类法的观察者内差异(kappa值分别为0.57和0.53)以及观察者间差异(kappa值分别为0.41和0.43)均较高。将胫骨平台骨折分为单髁骨折与双髁骨折、单纯劈裂骨折与关节面塌陷伴/不伴劈裂骨折,可改善观察者内及观察者间的差异。

结论

当将Schatzker分类法和AO/OTA分类法用作治疗指导及评估患者预后时,必须考虑到其较高的观察者间差异。将胫骨平台骨折简单地分为单髁骨折与双髁骨折、单纯劈裂骨折与关节面塌陷伴/不伴劈裂骨折可能更为可靠。