Citation

Bahrs C, Schmal H, Lingenfelter E, Rolauffs B, Weise K, Dietz K, Helwig P. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2008; 9: 21.

Affiliation

BG Trauma Center, Eberhard-Karls-University, Schnarrenbergstr, 95, D-72076 Tuebingen, Germany. C.Bahrs@gmx.de

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group - BMC)

DOI

10.1186/1471-2474-9-21

PMID

18279527

PMCID

PMC2275241

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A precise modular topographic-morphological (MTM) classification for proximal humeral fractures may address current classification problems. The classification was developed to evaluate whether a very detailed classification exceeding the analysis of fractured parts may be a valuable tool. METHODS: Three observers classified plain radiographs of 22 fractures using both a simple version (fracture displacement, number of parts) and an extensive version (individual topographic fracture type and morphology) of the MTM classification. Kappa-statistics were used to determine reliability. RESULTS: An acceptable reliability was found for the simple version classifying fracture displacement and fractured main parts. Fair interobserver agreement was found for the extensive version with individual topographic fracture type and morphology. CONCLUSION: Although the MTM-classification covers a wide spectrum of fracture types, our results indicate that the precise topographic and morphological description is not delivering reproducible results. Therefore, simplicity in fracture classification may be more useful than extensive approaches, which are not adequately reliable to address current classification problems.

Language: en