96 research outputs found

    A validation of the Nottingham Clavicle Score: a clavicle, acromioclavicular joint and sternoclavicular joint–specific patient-reported outcome measure

    Get PDF
    Background Patients with acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) and sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) injuries and with clavicle fractures are typically younger and more active than those with other shoulder pathologies. We developed the Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS) specifically for this group of patients to improve sensitivity for assessing the outcomes of treatment of these conditions compared with the more commonly used Constant Score (CS) and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS). Materials and methods This was a cohort study in which the preoperative and 6-month postoperative NCS evaluations of outcome in 90 patients were compared with the CS, OSS, Imatani Score (IS), and the EQ-5D scores. Reliability was assessed using the Cronbach α. Reproducibility of the NCS was assessed using the test/retest method. Effect sizes were calculated for each score to assess sensitivity to change. Validity was examined by correlations between the NCS and the CS, OSS, IS, and EQ-5D scores obtained preoperatively and postoperatively. Results Significant correlations were demonstrated preoperatively with the OSS (P = .025) and all subcategories of the EQ-5D (P < .05) and postoperatively with the OSS (P < .001), CS (P = .008), IS (P < .001), and all subcategories of EQ-5D (P < .02). The NCS had the largest effect size (1.92) of the compared scores. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach α = 0.87). Conclusion The NCS has been proven to be a valid, reliable and sensitive outcome measure that accurately measures the level of function and disability in the ACJ, SCJ and clavicle after traumatic injury and in degenerative disease

    Conservative treatment of fractures of the clavicle

    Get PDF
    Background: In the treatment of clavicle fractures, the choice of procedure depends on the possibility of restoring the anatomical functional integrity of the shoulder. Methods: We examined 71 patients (51 males and 20 females, mean age 38.9 years) who were affected by clavicle fracture sequelae. Demographic and clinical data and the site of the lesion were recorded for each partecipant. The dissatisfaction of the patient was determined by the presence of 1 or more affirmative answers on the Simple Shoulder Test. The Constant Shoulder Score was also included in the functional and clinical exams. We measured the length of the healthy clavicle and the previously fractured clavicle, and we expressed the difference in length in mm and in percentage shortening. We then examined the correlations between the shortening of the bone and the clinical and functional outcomes of the patients. Results: Sixty patients had a lesion of the diaphysis, 8 patients had a lesion of the lateral third of the clavicle, and 3 patients had a lesion of the medial third of the clavicle. The mean Constant Shoulder Score was 77.9, and 51 of the 71 patients were satisfied with their treatment. Radiography showed a mean clavicle shortening of 10 mm (mean percentage 6.5%). In the 20 dissatisfied patients, the mean clavicle shortening was 15.2 mm (9.7%). In these patients, we found a highly significant association between dissatisfaction with treatment and the amount of bone shortening, (p &lt; 0.0001), as well as with a diaphyseal location (p &lt; 0.05) and with the female sex (p = 0.004). No other variable related to the patient, the type of treatment or the fracture characteristics correlated with the treatment outcome. Conclusions: In the literature, measurements of the shortening of the bone segment following a fracture range between 15 and 23 mm, and marked shortening is correlated with the failure of conservative treatment. However, these data need to be reinterpreted in light of the physiological variability of the clavicle length, which ranges from 140 to 158 mm in the healthy population. Shortening of the bone by more than 9.7% should be the cut-off for predicting failure of conservative treatment

    Interobserver reliability of classification and characterization of proximal humeral fractures: a comparison of two and three-dimensional CT

    Full text link
    Interobserver reliability for the classification of proximal humeral fractures is limited. The aim of this study was to test the null hypothesis that interobserver reliability of the AO classification of proximal humeral fractures, the preferred treatment, and fracture characteristics is the same for two-dimensional (2-D) and three-dimensional (3-D) computed tomography (CT). Members of the Science of Variation Group--fully trained practicing orthopaedic and trauma surgeons from around the world--were randomized to evaluate radiographs and either 2-D CT or 3-D CT images of fifteen proximal humeral fractures via a web-based survey and respond to the following four questions: (1) Is the greater tuberosity displaced? (2) Is the humeral head split? (3) Is the arterial supply compromised? (4) Is the glenohumeral joint dislocated? They also classified the fracture according to the AO system and indicated their preferred treatment of the fracture (operative or nonoperative). Agreement among observers was assessed with use of the multirater kappa (&kappa;) measure. Interobserver reliability of the AO classification, fracture characteristics, and preferred treatment generally ranged from &quot;slight&quot; to &quot;fair.&quot; A few small but statistically significant differences were found. Observers randomized to the 2-D CT group had slightly but significantly better agreement on displacement of the greater tuberosity (&kappa; = 0.35 compared with 0.30, p &lt; 0.001) and on the AO classification (&kappa; = 0.18 compared with 0.17, p = 0.018). A subgroup analysis of the AO classification results revealed that shoulder and elbow surgeons, orthopaedic trauma surgeons, and surgeons in the United States had slightly greater reliability on 2-D CT, whereas surgeons in practice for ten years or less and surgeons from other subspecialties had slightly greater reliability on 3-D CT. Proximal humeral fracture classifications may be helpful conceptually, but they have poor interobserver reliability even when 3-D rather than 2-D CT is utilized. This may contribute to the similarly poor interobserver reliability that was observed for selection of the treatment for proximal humeral fractures. The lack of a reliable classification confounds efforts to compare the outcomes of treatment methods among different clinical trials and reports
    • …
    corecore