Interobserver Variability Of Neer Classification

Authors

  • Juan Fernández la Villa Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres. Cáceres, España
  • David Fernández Fernández Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres
  • Victoriano Javier Luque-Merino Hospital de Don Benito-Villanueva
  • Marco Antonio Nogales-Asensio Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres
  • César Fernando Mancera-Ávila Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rccot.2019.10.002

Keywords:

proximal humerus fractures, Neer’s classification, interobserver variability

Abstract

Background: To study inter-observer variability by evaluating a fracture of the proximal humerus using Neer’s classification and to establish its diagnostic and therapeutic utility.
Methods: A computerised form was used with 20 randomly selected cases of fractures ofthe proximal humerus, from the same hospital between 2010 and 2014. Each case included: age, gender, laterality, and two radiographic projections. They were anonymously evaluated by Traumatologists, for whom shoulder surgery was routine practice or not, from national and international hospitals. They indicated Neer stage and an appropriate therapeutic option. Interobserver variability was established between groups, and comparing all of them equally, calculating Fleap’s Kappa index and interpreting it according to the Landis and Koch criteria.
Results: A total of 40 responses were obtained from the Traumatologists, 15 of them were shoulder surgery was usual practice and 25 where it was not. The mean Fleap Kappa index was 0.173 in the Traumatologists group were shoulder surgery was usual practice, being 0.176 in the group were it was not usual practice. The overall index was 0.184. There is wide interobserver variability in the therapeutic indication, as well as within the surgical indication.
Discussion: The level of agreement obtained, according to the criteria of Landis and Koch, was poor in all groups in terms of stage, and weak in terms of treatment. The experience of the Traumatologist had no influence. A more reproducible classification may be necessary since Neer’s classification has sufficient interobserver variability to accept it as the sole means of decision making.
Evidence Level: III.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Juan Fernández la Villa, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres. Cáceres, España

F.E.A Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres, Cáceres, España.

David Fernández Fernández, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres

Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres.

Victoriano Javier Luque-Merino, Hospital de Don Benito-Villanueva

Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología, Hospital de Don Benito-Villanueva.

Marco Antonio Nogales-Asensio, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres

Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres.

César Fernando Mancera-Ávila, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres

Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología, Complejo Universitario Hospitalario de Cáceres.

References

Breasted J. The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1933. p. 596.

Jakob RP, Ganz R. Proximal humerus fractures. Helv Chir Acta. 1982;48:595-610.

Papakonstantinou MK, Hart MJ, Farrugia R, Gabbe BJ, Kamali Moaveni A, van Bavel D, Page RS, Richardson MD. Interobserver agreement of Neer and AO classifications for proximal humeral fractures. ANZ J Surg. 2016;86:280-4, 10.1111/ans.13451. Epub Feb 172016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.13451

Brorson S, Olsen BS, Frich LH, Jensen SL, Sørensen AK, Krogsgaard M, Hróbjartsson A. Surgeons agree more on treatmentrecommendations than on classification of proximal humeral fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012;13:114, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-13-114

Foroohar A, Tosti R, Richmond JM, Gaughan JP, Ilyas AM. Classification and treatment of proximal humerus fractures: inter-observer reliability and agreement across imaging modalities and experience. J Orthop Surg Res. 2011;6:38, https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-6-38

Majed A, Macleod I, Bull AM, Zyto K, Resch H, Hertel R, Reilly P, Emery RJ. Proximal humeral fracture classification systems revisited. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20:1125-32. EpubApr 92011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.020

Brorson S, Hróbjartsson A. Training improves agreement among doctors using the Neer system for proximal humeral fractures in a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:7-16. Epub Aug 232007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.04.014

Brorson S, Bagger J, Sylvest A, Hróbjartsson A. Low agreement among 24 doctors using the Neer-classification; only moderate agreement on displacement, even between specialists. Int Orthop. 2002;26:271-3. Epub Jun 82002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-002-0369-x

Brorson S, Bagger J, Sylvest A, Hrøbjartsson A. Improved interobserver variation after training of doctors in the Neer system. A randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002;84:950-4. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.84B7.0840950

Published

2020-01-06

How to Cite

1.
Fernández la Villa J, Fernández Fernández D, Luque-Merino VJ, Nogales-Asensio MA, Mancera-Ávila CF. Interobserver Variability Of Neer Classification. Rev. Colomb. Ortop. Traumatol. [Internet]. 2020 Jan. 6 [cited 2025 May 11];33(1-2):10-4. Available from: https://revistasccotorg.biteca.online/index.php/rccot/article/view/287

Issue

Section

Original research