Almeida Vinícius Alexandre de Souza, Fernandes Carlos Henrique, Santos João Baptista Gomes Dos, Schwarz-Fernandes Francisco Alberto, Faloppa Flavio, Albertoni Walter Manna
Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
College of Medicine Orthopedic, University of South Florida, Tampa, United States.
Rev Bras Ortop. 2017 Dec 12;53(1):2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rboe.2017.12.001. eCollection 2018 Jan-Feb.
To measure the reliability of Albertoni's classification for mallet finger.
Agreement study. Forty-three radiographs of patients with mallet finger were assessed by 19 responders (12 hand surgeons and seven residents). Injuries were classified by Albertoni's classification. For agreement comparison, lesions were grouped as: (A) tendon avulsion; (B) avulsion fracture; (C) fracture of the dorsal lip; and (D) physis injury-and subgroups (each group divided into two subgroups). Agreement was assessed by Fleiss's modification for kappa statistics.
Agreement was excellent for Group A ( = 0.95 (0.93-0.97)) and remained good when separated into A1 and A2. Group B was moderate ( = 0.42 (0.39-0.44)) and poor when separated into B1 and B2. In the Group C, agreement was good ( = 0.72 (0.70-0.74)), but when separated into C1 and C2, it became moderate. Group D was always poor ( = 0.16 (0.14-0.19)). The general agreement was moderate, with ( = 0.57 (0.56-0.58)).
Albertoni's classification evaluated for interobserver agreement is considered a reproducible classification by the method used in the research.
评估阿尔贝托尼槌状指分类法的可靠性。
一致性研究。19名应答者（12名手外科医生和7名住院医师）对43例槌状指患者的X线片进行评估。损伤按照阿尔贝托尼分类法进行分类。为了比较一致性，损伤被分为：（A）肌腱撕脱；（B）撕脱性骨折；（C）背侧唇骨折；（D）骨骺损伤——以及亚组（每组再分为两个亚组）。通过弗莱斯对kappa统计量的修正来评估一致性。
A组一致性极佳（κ = 0.95（0.93 - 0.97）），分为A1和A2时仍保持良好。B组一致性中等（κ = 0.42（0.39 - 0.44）），分为B1和B2时较差。C组一致性良好（κ = 0.72（0.70 - 0.74）），但分为C1和C2时变为中等。D组一致性始终较差（κ = 0.16（0.14 - 0.19））。总体一致性中等（κ = 0.57（0.56 - 0.58））。
通过本研究中使用的方法评估，阿尔贝托尼分类法在观察者间一致性方面被认为是一种可重复的分类方法。
