RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: A fracture classification system should provide a reliable and reproducible means of communication between different parties. It should be logical and understandable, with few categories to memorize. The aim of this study was to determine the intra- and interobserver reliability of the Schatzker and Mayo classification systems for the assessment of proximal ulna fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intra- and interobserver reliability studies were conducted on 39 X-rays of injured elbows drawn randomly from 74 cases previously used in a series on predictors of ulnohumeral osteoarthritis in proximal ulna fractures. Ten observers independently reviewed these X-rays on 2 separate occasions 3 months apart. The fracture type was assessed according to the Schatzker and Mayo classification systems during each reading session. Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa were used to measure the intra- and interobserver reliability. RESULTS: The Schatzker classification had a fair interobserver reliability for the first (Schatzker R1, Fleiss' κ: 0.394) and second (Schatzker R2, Fleiss' κ: 0.351) readings. The mean intraobserver reliability value between the 10 reviewers for the Schatzker classification was rated as substantial (0.61). The Mayo classification had a fair interobserver reliability for the first (Mayo R1, Fleiss' κ: 0.278) and second (Mayo R2, Fleiss' κ: 0.292) readings. The mean intraobserver reliability value between the 10 reviewers for the Mayo classification was rated as fair (0.52). DISCUSSION: The classification systems for proximal ulna fractures showed poor reproducibility between the different observers since they had low interobserver agreement values. Nevertheless, their use remained reliable since the measured intraobserver agreement value was deemed substantial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective.
RESUMO
The purpose was to systematically review and synthesize the literature on treatment modalities for shoulder stiffness following rotator cuff repair (RCR) and investigate which modality provides the greatest postoperative range of motion (ROM). A search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Clinical case series and comparative studies that report pre- and posttreatment ROM of shoulder stiffness following RCR were included. Studies that exclusively assess idiopathic frozen shoulder or primary shoulder stiffness were excluded. Five eligible studies that reported on a total of 177 patients who underwent treatment for shoulder stiffness following RCR were included. The ranges of postoperative ROM following arthroscopic capsular release were 158°-166° for active forward elevation (AFE) and 53°-59° for external rotation (ER). The ranges of postoperative ROM following infiltration were 146°-163° for AFE and 34°-35° for ER. The ranges of postoperative ROM following rehabilitation were 166° for AFE and 62° for ER. For AFE, 4 studies (5 data sets) were eligible for meta-analysis, which indicated better AFE when treated with a mean difference (MD) of 5.10° with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, CI, 0.83-9.38). For ER, 3 studies (4 data sets) were eligible for meta-analysis, which indicated better ER without treatment with an MD of 4.59° with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, CI, -7.04 to -2.13). For the treatment of shoulder stiffness following RCR, all included treatments improved the ROM, resulting in comparable AFE and ER compared to the comparative group. Among the treatment modalities, arthroscopic capsular release granted the greatest posttreatment AFE, while rehabilitation granted the greatest posttreatment ER.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Acromioclavicular (AC) joint separation is a common shoulder injury. When the injury is graded as type III or higher in the Rockwood classification, surgical treatment can be proposed. However, an increasing number of practitioners are shifting back to conservative treatment as it is associated with fewer complications and seemingly close functional outcomes. The aim of our study was to evaluate the functional recovery of operated and non-operated patients with grade III or higher AC joint injuries. Secondarily, the reliability and relevance of the Rockwood classification was evaluated within and between raters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We did a retrospective two-center study of 38 patients treated between 2014 and 2020. The clinical evaluation involved various functional outcome scores (Constant, QuickDASH, ASES, UCLA, SSV, STT) and a pain assessment (VAS). Return to sports and to work was also documented. The radiological evaluation consisted of Zanca AP and lateral axillary views immediately after the injury and at each radiographic follow-up visit until the final visit. An intra- and inter-rater analysis was also done for the Rockwood classification. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the functional scores (Constant score surgery group=91, nonoperative group=83; p=0.09) or the pain on VAS at the final assessment. Return to work and to sports was significantly faster in patients treated non-operatively. No complication was found in the non-operated patients, while nine of the operated patients suffered a complication. The inter-rater reliability of the Rockwood classification was found to be poor (kappa=0.08) to fair (kappa=0.35), while the intra-rater reliability was moderate (kappa=0.6) to good (kappa=0.63). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: No matter which treatment is used, the functional outcomes and patient satisfaction level a minimum of 1 year after the injury appear to be identical. Thus, surgery should be only for patients whose AC joint is painful 7 days after the injury (VAS>7) and whose function has not improved. For young and athletic patients or for patients who simply want to regain nearly normal function, it is important to remember that the time to return to work and sports is longer with surgical management and to take into consideration the potential postoperative complications. While none of the patients who received the non-operative treatment required a secondary stabilizing surgery, this is a possible recourse. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.