Abedi Aidin, Mokkink Lidwine B, Zadegan Shayan Abdollah, Paholpak Permsak, Tamai Koji, Wang Jeffrey C, Buser Zorica
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Global Spine J. 2019 Apr;9(2):231-242. doi: 10.1177/2192568218806847. Epub 2018 Oct 15.
Systematic review.
The AOSpine thoracolumbar injury classification system (ATLICS) is a relatively simple yet comprehensive classification of spine injuries introduced in 2013. This systematic review summarizes the evidence on measurement properties of this new classification, particularly the reliability and validity of the main morphologic injury types with and without inclusion of the subtypes.
A literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase in September 2016. A revised version of the COSMIN checklist was used for evaluation of the quality of studies. Two independent reviewers performed all steps of the review.
Nine articles were included in the final review, all of which evaluated the reliability of the ATLICS and had a fair methodological quality. The reliability of the modifiers was unknown. Overall, the quality of evidence for reliability of the morphologic and neurologic classification sections was low. However, there was moderate evidence for poor interobserver reliability of the morphologic classification when all subtypes were included, and moderate evidence for good intraobserver reliability with exclusion of subtypes. The reliability of the morphologic classification was independent of the observer's experience and cultural background.
ATLICS represents the most current system for evaluation of thoracolumbar injuries. Based on this review, further studies with robust methodological quality are needed to evaluate the measurement properties of ATLICS. Shortcomings of the reliability studies are discussed.
系统评价。
AO脊柱胸腰椎损伤分类系统(ATLICS)是2013年推出的一种相对简单但全面的脊柱损伤分类。本系统评价总结了关于这一新分类测量特性的证据,特别是主要形态学损伤类型(包括和不包括亚型)的可靠性和有效性。
2016年9月使用PubMed和Embase进行文献检索。使用修订版的COSMIN清单评估研究质量。两名独立审稿人完成了评价的所有步骤。
最终评价纳入9篇文章,所有文章均评估了ATLICS 的可靠性,且方法学质量尚可。修饰词的可靠性未知。总体而言,形态学和神经学分类部分可靠性的证据质量较低。然而,有中等证据表明,纳入所有亚型时,形态学分类的观察者间可靠性较差;排除亚型时,有中等证据表明观察者内可靠性良好。形态学分类的可靠性与观察者的经验和文化背景无关。
ATLICS是目前评估胸腰椎损伤的最新系统。基于本评价,需要开展方法学质量可靠的进一步研究来评估ATLICS的测量特性。讨论了可靠性研究的不足之处。