A comparative agreement evaluation of two subaxial cervical spine injury classification systems: the AOSpine and the Allen and Ferguson schemes.

PURPOSE: We performed an agreement study using two subaxial cervical spine classification systems: the AOSpine and the Allen and Ferguson (A&F) classifications. We sought to determine which scheme allows better agreement by different evaluators and by the same evaluator on different occasions. METHODS: Complete imaging studies of 65 patients with subaxial cervical spine injuries were classified by six evaluators (three spine sub-specialists and three senior orthopaedic surgery residents) using the AOSpine subaxial cervical spine classification system and the A&F scheme. The cases were displayed in a random sequence after a 6-week interval for repeat evaluation. The Kappa coefficient (κ) was used to determine inter- and intra-observer agreement. RESULTS: Inter-observer: considering the main AO injury types, the agreement was substantial for the AOSpine classification [κ = 0.61 (0.57-0.64)]; using AO sub-types, the agreement was moderate [κ = 0.57 (0.54-0.60)]. For the A&F classification, the agreement [κ = 0.46 (0.42-0.49)] was significantly lower than using the AOSpine scheme. Intra-observer: the agreement was substantial considering injury types [κ = 0.68 (0.62-0.74)] and considering sub-types [κ = 0.62 (0.57-0.66)]. Using the A&F classification, the agreement was also substantial [κ = 0.66 (0.61-0.71)]. No significant differences were observed between spine surgeons and orthopaedic residents in the overall inter- and intra-observer agreement, or in the inter- and intra-observer agreement of specific type of injuries. CONCLUSION: The AOSpine classification (using the four main injury types or at the sub-types level) allows a significantly better agreement than the A&F classification. The A&F scheme does not allow reliable communication between medical professionals.