TIBIAL PLATEAU FRACTURES: INTER-RATER RELIABILITY FOR SURGICAL DECISION MAKING
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Tibial plateau fractures can result in significant disability and post-traumatic arthritis. They are typically classified using the AO/OTA and Schatzker classifications; however, there is a lack of evidence to define cut-off indications for surgical repair based on joint depression and/or stability (Schatzker I, II, III or AO 41.B1,2,3). The aim of the study was to determine surgeon agreement for surgical indications in a series of real cases deemed ‘borderline’ and to define the most important factors involved in surgical decision making. A survey was designed that included six tibial plateau fracture cases (Schatzker I, II, III, AO Type 41.B1,2,3). These were cases generally deemed borderline for operative management by the senior authors, with depression < 6 mm and condylar widening < 5 mm, and no significant comminution. The survey was sent out through the Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA), Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society (COTS), and Austrian Society of Trauma Surgery (ÖGU). Participants were asked to review x-rays and CT scans as well as a brief clinical history for each patient and then select to offer either surgical or non-surgical management. Questions were then asked to identify and rank factors influencing the decision (fracture pattern, depression, activity level, age, osteoarthritis, comorbidities, malalignment, and instability). Data was collected through Survey Monkey. Data analysis included participant completion rate, demographic data and agreement on surgical indications. Rank sum analysis was performed for most important factors for decision making. The clinical features of cases with high and low treatment agreement were analysed further with a specific emphasis on joint depression. 189 orthopedic surgeons, fellows, and residents responded to the survey. The completion rate was 64% (70% staff, 30% trainees). There were minimal differences between the responses of trainees and staff. Three cases had high agreement (>80%) for either operative or non-operative treatment. The most frequently reported factor in decision making was fracture pattern (86%; rank value 2.0), followed by amount of depression (79%; rank value 2.1) and age (56%). Co-morbidity was the third highest ranked factor. Depression was 5mm and 7mm for the cases offered surgery. Three cases had low agreement (∼50%) for either operative or non-operative treatment. The most frequently reported factors were amount of depression (82%; rank 1.8), followed by fracture pattern (73%; rank 2.0) and age (60%). Absence or presence of knee instability was also deemed important. Depression was ∼4mm for two of the cases and 2mm for the other. The agreement among Orthopaedic Surgeons to operate on a series of ‘borderline’ Type I-III Schatzker tibial plateau fractures ranged between 51 and 99%. Cases with both high and low agreement cited fracture pattern and amount of depression as critically important. This suggests that while surgeons believe those factors are important in their decision-making process they do not uniformly agree on the parameters. The least agreement revolved around cases with depression around 4mm. These results suggest that further research is needed to objectively define the benefits (or lack thereof) of surgical treatment within these common subtypes of fractures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,186 | 0,265 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».