Martin J S, Marsh J L
Department of Orthopaedics, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, USA.
Radiol Clin North Am. 1997 May;35(3):491-506.
Fracture classification systems are used on a daily basis in any busy orthopedic clinic. They are an essential means by which physicians communicate, make treatment decisions, estimate prognosis, and report and compare results. Until recently, these classifications have been designed, accepted, and utilized without formal critique. By studying and understanding the shortcomings of previous systems, we can use this knowledge to construct better ones. Ideally, a fracture classification, like any classification, should be reliable, reproducible, all inclusive, mutually exclusive, logical, and clinically useful. The AO/ASIF classification of long bone fractures provides a unified scheme of classification for fractures of the entire skeleton. Despite addressing many of the faults of previous classifications, the observer agreement for this system drops to unacceptable levels at the group and subgroup levels. Further study is warranted to determine how this agreement can be improved.
在任何繁忙的骨科诊所，骨折分类系统每天都会被使用。它们是医生进行沟通、做出治疗决策、评估预后以及报告和比较结果的重要手段。直到最近，这些分类都是在没有正式批评的情况下设计、接受和使用的。通过研究和理解先前系统的缺点，我们可以利用这些知识构建更好的系统。理想情况下，骨折分类与任何分类一样，应该是可靠的、可重复的、涵盖所有情况的、相互排斥的、合乎逻辑的且具有临床实用性。AO/ASIF长骨骨折分类为整个骨骼的骨折提供了一个统一的分类方案。尽管该系统解决了先前分类的许多缺陷，但在组和亚组层面，该系统的观察者一致性降至不可接受的水平。有必要进行进一步研究以确定如何提高这种一致性。
