Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Clin Sports Med ; 41(4): 653-670, 2022 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36210164

RESUMEN

Tibial spine fractures are a relatively rare injury in the young athlete. Previously thought to be the equivalent of a "pediatric anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear," contemporary understanding of these injuries classifies them as distinct from ACL injuries in this patient population. Successful treatment hinges on accurate diagnosis paying special attention to fracture displacement and the presence of concomitant intraarticular injury. Surgery can be performed using open or arthroscopic techniques and a variety of fixation options. The most common complication after surgical treatment is arthrofibrosis and, therefore, stable fixation is necessary to allow for early, unimpeded knee motion postoperatively.


Asunto(s)
Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral , Fracturas de la Tibia , Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirugía , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/complicaciones , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/diagnóstico , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirugía , Artroscopía/métodos , Atletas , Niño , Fijación Interna de Fracturas/métodos , Humanos , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/complicaciones , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Técnicas de Sutura/efectos adversos , Fracturas de la Tibia/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas de la Tibia/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
J Pediatr Orthop ; 42(6): e696-e700, 2022 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35667059

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Understanding differences between types of study design (SD) and level of evidence (LOE) are important when selecting research for presentation or publication and determining its potential clinical impact. The purpose of this study was to evaluate interobserver and intraobserver reliability when assigning LOE and SD as well as quantify the impact of a commonly used reference aid on these assessments. METHODS: Thirty-six accepted abstracts from the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) 2021 annual meeting were selected for this study. Thirteen reviewers from the POSNA Evidence-Based Practice Committee were asked to determine LOE and SD for each abstract, first without any assistance or resources. Four weeks later, abstracts were reviewed again with the guidance of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) LOE chart, which is adapted from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were calculated using Fleiss' kappa statistic (k). χ2 analysis was used to compare the rate of SD-LOE mismatch between the first and second round of reviews. RESULTS: Interobserver reliability for LOE improved slightly from fair (k=0.28) to moderate (k=0.43) with use of the JBJS chart. There was better agreement with increasing LOE, with the most frequent disagreement between levels 3 and 4. Interobserver reliability for SD was fair for both rounds 1 (k=0.29) and 2 (k=0.37). Similar to LOE, there was better agreement with stronger SD. Intraobserver reliability was widely variable for both LOE and SD (k=0.10 to 0.92 for both). When matching a selected SD to its associated LOE, the overall rate of correct concordance was 82% in round 1 and 92% in round 2 (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Interobserver reliability for LOE and SD was fair to moderate at best, even among experienced reviewers. Use of the JBJS/Oxford chart mildly improved agreement on LOE and resulted in less SD-LOE mismatch, but did not affect agreement on SD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.


Asunto(s)
Ortopedia , Proyectos de Investigación , Niño , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Humanos , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...