Comparison between the Pediatric AO Classification and the Dias-Tachdjian Classification in Pediatric Ankle Fractures

Main Article Content

Agustina Ponzone
Andrés Roncoroni
Fernando Miscione
Eduardo L Baroni
Bibiana Dello Russo

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to analyze the degree of reliability of the two most widely used classification systems for pediatric ankle fractures.MethodsWe studied 53 patients (34 boys and 19 girls) with ankle fractures. Two classifications were used. A detailed study was carried out calculating the Cohen’s kappa index to measure intraobserver reliability and the kappa value was deduced using the Fleiss method to determine interobserver agreement.ResultsThe intraobserver and interobserver agreement was not significantly different between the different groups of assessors.ConclusionsIn the pediatric age, different types of fractures and different mechanisms within an isolated fracture can be found. We found that many of these fracture patterns do not fit in any of the two classifications, which are unproductive to guide treatment selection.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Article Details

How to Cite
Ponzone, A., Roncoroni, A., Miscione, F., Baroni, E. L., & Dello Russo, B. (2013). Comparison between the Pediatric AO Classification and the Dias-Tachdjian Classification in Pediatric Ankle Fractures. Revista De La Asociación Argentina De Ortopedia Y Traumatología, 78(1), 26-30. https://doi.org/10.15417/139
Section
Clinical Research

References

1. Dias LS, Tachdjian MO. Physeal injuries of the ankle in children: classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1978;136:230-3.

2. Slongo TF, Audigé L. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium for children: The AO Pediatric. J Orthop Trauma 2007;21(Suppl. 10):S135-60.

Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, Broderick JS, Creevey W, DeCoster TA, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium - 2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma 2007;21(Suppl. 10):S1-133.

4. Michelson JD, Ahn U, Magid D. Economic analysis of roentgenogram use in the closed treatment of stable ankle fractures. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care 1995;39:1119-22.

5. Schnetzler KA, Hoernschemeyer D. The pediatric triplane ankle fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007;15(12):738-47.

6. Harris EJ. Epiphyseal plate injuries in pediatric ankle traumatology. J Foot Surg 1981;20(3):145-7.

7. Cottalorda J, Béranger V, Louahem D, Camilleri JP, Launay F, Diméglio A, et al. Salter-Harris type III and IV medial malleolar fractures: growth arrest: is it a fate? A retrospective study of 48 cases with open reduction. J Pediatr Orthop 2008;28(6):652-5.

8. Leary JT, Handling M, Talerico M, Yong L, Bowe JA. Physeal fractures of the distal tibia. Predictive factors of premature physeal closure and growth arrest. J Pediatr Orthop 2009;29(4):356-61.

9. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960;20:37-46.

10. Cerda J, Villarroel L. Evaluación de la concordancia interobservador en investigación pediátrica: Coeficiente de Kappa. Rev Chil Pediatr 2008;79(1):54-8.

11. Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.

12. Charlton M, Costello R, Mooney JF, Podeszwa DA. Ankle joint biomechanics following transepiphyseal screw fixation of the distal tibia. J Pediatr Orthop 2005;25:635-40.

13. De Sanctis N, Della Corte S, Pempinello C. Distal tibial and fibular epiphyseal fractures in children: prognostic criteria and long term results in 158 patients. J Pediatr Orthop 2000;9:40-4.