Global Validation of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification: Geographic Region Affects Reliability and Reproducibility.

Lambrechts, Mark J; Schroeder, Gregory D; Karamian, Brian A; Canseco, Jose A; Bransford, Richard; Oner, Cumhur; Benneker, Lorin M; Kandziora, Frank; Shanmuganathan, Rajasekaran; Kanna, Rishi; Joaquim, Andrei F; Chapman, Jens R; Vialle, Emiliano; El-Sharkawi, Mohammad; Dvorak, Marcel; Schnake, Klaus; Kepler, Christopher K; Vaccaro, Alexander R (2024). Global Validation of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification: Geographic Region Affects Reliability and Reproducibility. Global spine journal, 14(3), pp. 821-829. Sage 10.1177/21925682221124100

[img]
Preview
Text
21925682221124100.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND).

Download (905kB) | Preview

STUDY DESIGN

Global Survey.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accuracy, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility of the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System based on surgeons' AO Spine region of practice (Africa, Asia, Central/South America, Europe, Middle East, and North America).

METHODS

A total of 275 AO Spine members assessed 25 upper cervical spine injuries and classified them according to the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System. Reliability, reproducibility, and accuracy scores were obtained over two assessments administered at three-week intervals. Kappa coefficients (ƙ) determined the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility.

RESULTS

On both assessments, participants from Europe and North America had the highest classification accuracy, while participants from Africa and Central/South America had the lowest accuracy (P < .0001). Participants from Africa (assessment 1 (AS1):ƙ = .487; AS2:0.491), Central/South America (AS1:ƙ = .513; AS2:0.511), and the Middle East (AS1:0.591; AS2: .599) achieved moderate reliability, while participants from North America (AS1:ƙ = .673; AS2:0.648) and Europe (AS1:ƙ = .682; AS2:0.681) achieved substantial reliability. Asian participants obtained substantial reliability on AS1 (ƙ = .632), but moderate reliability on AS2 (ƙ = .566). Although there was a large effect size, the low number of participants in certain regions did not provide adequate certainty that AO regions affected the likelihood of participants having excellent reproducibility (P = .342).

CONCLUSIONS

The AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System can be applied with high accuracy, interobserver reliability, and intraobserver reproducibility. However, lower classification accuracy and reliability were found in regions of Africa and Central/South America, especially for severe atlas injuries (IIB and IIC) and atypical hangman's type fractures (IIIB injuries).

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Orthopaedic, Plastic and Hand Surgery (DOPH) > Clinic of Orthopaedic Surgery

UniBE Contributor:

Benneker, Lorin Michael

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

2192-5682

Publisher:

Sage

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

31 Aug 2022 10:09

Last Modified:

10 Apr 2024 00:11

Publisher DOI:

10.1177/21925682221124100

PubMed ID:

36036763

Uncontrolled Keywords:

AO spine cervical injury classification validation

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/172480

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/172480

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback