Suppr超能文献

在22位脊柱创伤护理临床专家中,使用AO脊柱胸腰椎损伤分类系统对胸腰椎骨折进行分类时的观察者间可靠性。

Interobserver Reliability in the Classification of Thoracolumbar Fractures Using the AO Spine TL Injury Classification System Among 22 Clinical Experts in Spine Trauma Care.

作者信息

Canseco Jose A, Paziuk Taylor, Schroeder Gregory D, Dvorak Marcel F, Öner Cumhur F, Benneker Lorin M, Vialle Emiliano, Rajasekaran Shanmuganathan, El-Sharkawi Mohammad, Bransford Richard J, Kanna Rishi M, Holas Martin, Muijs Sander, Popescu Eugen Cezar, Dandurand Charlotte, Tee Jin W, Camino-Willhuber Gaston, Aly Mohamed M, Joaquim Andrei Fernandes, Keynan Ory, Chhabra Harvinder Singh, Bigdon Sebastian, Spiegl Ulrich J, Schnake Klaus, Vaccaro Alexander R

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Combined Neurosurgical and Orthopedic Spine Program, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

出版信息

Global Spine J. 2024 Feb;14(1_suppl):17S-24S. doi: 10.1177/21925682231202371.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Reliability study utilizing 183 injury CT scans by 22 spine trauma experts with assessment of radiographic features, classification of injuries and treatment recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the reliability of the AOSpine TL Injury Classification System (TLICS) including the categories within the classification and the M1 modifier.

METHODS

Kappa and Intraclass correlation coefficients were produced. Associations of various imaging characteristics (comminution, PLC status) and treatment recommendations were analyzed through regression analysis. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used for making predictive algorithms.

RESULTS

Reliability of the AO Spine TLICS at differentiating A3 and A4 injuries (N = 71) (K = .466; 95% CI .458 - .474; < .001) demonstrated moderate agreement. Similarly, the average intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) amongst A3 and A4 injuries was excellent (ICC = .934; 95% CI .919 - .947; < .001) and the ICC between individual measures was moderate (ICC = .403; 95% CI .351 - .461; < .001). The overall agreement on the utilization of the M1 modifier amongst A3 and A4 injuries was fair (K = .161; 95% CI .151 - .171; < .001). The ICC for PLC status in A3 and A4 injuries averaged across all measures was excellent (ICC = .936; 95% CI .922 - .949; < .001). The M1 modifier suggests respondents are nearly 40% more confident that the PLC is injured amongst all injuries. The M1 modifier was employed at a higher frequency as injuries were classified higher in the classification system.

CONCLUSIONS

The reliability of surgeons differentiating between A3 and A4 injuries in the AOSpine TLICS is substantial and the utilization of the M1 modifier occurs more frequently with higher grades in the system.

摘要

研究设计

可靠性研究,22位脊柱创伤专家对183例损伤CT扫描进行影像学特征评估、损伤分类及治疗建议。

目的

评估AOSpine胸腰段损伤分类系统(TLICS)的可靠性,包括分类中的类别及M1修正因子。

方法

计算kappa系数和组内相关系数。通过回归分析各种影像学特征(粉碎性、后方韧带复合体状态)与治疗建议之间的关联。采用多变量逻辑回归建模制定预测算法。

结果

AO脊柱TLICS在区分A3和A4损伤(N = 71)时的可靠性(K = 0.466;95%置信区间0.458 - 0.474;P < 0.001)显示为中等一致性。同样,A3和A4损伤之间的平均组内相关系数(ICC)极佳(ICC = 0.934;95%置信区间0.919 - 0.947;P < 0.001),个体测量之间的ICC为中等(ICC = 0.403;95%置信区间0.351 - 0.461;P < 0.001)。A3和A4损伤中使用M1修正因子的总体一致性为一般(K = 0.161;95%置信区间0.151 - 0.171;P < 0.001)。A3和A4损伤中后方韧带复合体状态在所有测量中的平均ICC极佳(ICC = 0.936;95%置信区间0.922 - 0.949;P < 0.001)。M1修正因子表明,在所有损伤中,受访者认为后方韧带复合体损伤的信心增加近40%。随着损伤在分类系统中的等级升高,M1修正因子的使用频率更高。

结论

外科医生在AOSpine TLICS中区分A3和A4损伤的可靠性较高,且M1修正因子在系统中随着等级升高使用更频繁。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0a50/10867533/19e8f8fecec3/10.1177_21925682231202371-fig1.jpg

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