Statistical analysis on the concordance of the radiological evaluation of fractures of the distal radius subjected to traction

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the current classifications for fractures of the distal extremity of the radius, since the classifications made using traditional radiographs in anteroposterior and lateral views have been questioned regarding their reproducibility. In the literature, it has been suggested that other options are needed, such as use of preoperative radiographs on fractures of the distal radius subjected to traction, with stratification by the evaluators. The aim was to demonstrate which classification systems present better statistical reliability.ResultsIn the Universal classification, the results from the third-year resident group (R3) and from the group of more experienced evaluators (Staff) presented excellent correlation, with a statistically significant p-value (p < 0.05). Neither of the groups presented a statistically significant result through the Frykman classification. In the AO classification, there were high correlations in the R3 and Staff groups (respectively 0.950 and 0.800), with p-values lower than 0.05 (respectively <0.001 and 0.003).ConclusionIt can be concluded that radiographs performed under traction showed good concordance in the Staff group and in the R3 group, and that this is a good tactic for radiographic evaluations of fractures of the distal extremity of the radius.

Avaliação da concordância interobservador no diagnóstico de lesões do anel pélvico posterior usando radiografia simples

“…Interobserver agreement was assessed by the Kappa test ( κ ) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs), and the values assumed for agreement were considered as follows: 0.20: poor; 0.21–0.40: fair; 0.41–0.60: moderate; 0.61–0.80: good; 0.81–1.00: very good. 4 5 6 The CT diagnosis was assumed as a reference evaluation. All analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US), version 22.0 for Windows.…”

“…A concordância interobservador foi avaliada pelo teste de Kappa ( κ ), com intervalos de confiança de 95% (IC95%), e os valores assumidos para a concordância foram considerados da seguinte forma: 0.20: muito fraca; 0.21–0.40: fraca; 0.41–0.60: moderada; 0.61–0.80: boa; 0.81–1.00: muito boa. 4 5 6 Como avaliação de referência foi assumido o diagnóstico oriundo da TC. Todas as análises foram realizadas utilizando o programa Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US), versão 22.0 para Windows.…”