Reliability of the classification and treatment of dislocations of the acromioclavicular joint

Classifications in Brief: Rockwood Classification of Acromioclavicular Joint Separations

“…Similarly, Cho et al [9] found fair to moderate reliability when using plain radiographs alone. Notably, because level of experience is expected to improve reliability, they recruited 10 shoulder surgeons with an average of 11.2 years of practice.…”

“…Regarding classification, the combination of 3-D CT and plain films yielded poor interobserver (j = 0.177) and moderate intraobserver reliability (j = 0.474). Regarding the decision for treatment, interobserver and intraobserver reliability were fair (j = 0.253) and moderate (j = 0.554), respectively [9].…”

“…Notably, because level of experience is expected to improve reliability, they recruited 10 shoulder surgeons with an average of 11.2 years of practice. Using the j correlation coefficient, interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification was found to be fair (j = 0.214) and moderate (j = 0.474), respectively [9]. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of treatment was fair (j = 0.213 and 0.399, respectively) [9].…”

“…Using the j correlation coefficient, interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification was found to be fair (j = 0.214) and moderate (j = 0.474), respectively [9]. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of treatment was fair (j = 0.213 and 0.399, respectively) [9]. Ng et al [22] assessed reliability among 19 British shoulder surgeons using 24 patients with Zanca-view radiographs alone.…”

“…Cho et al [9] investigated the effect on reliability of classification and treatment choice when radiographs are viewed with the addition of three-dimensional (3-D) CT. Regarding classification, the combination of 3-D CT and plain films yielded poor interobserver (j = 0.177) and moderate intraobserver reliability (j = 0.474).…”