header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

COMPARISON OF VISUAL ESTIMATIONS OF DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURE RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS BETWEEN DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ORTHOPAEDIC DOCTORS

The South African Orthopaedic Association (SAOA) September 2023 Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa, 4–7 September 2023.



Abstract

Distal radius fractures are common in South Africa. Accurate, decisive radiographic parameter interpretation is key in appropriate management. Digital radiographic facilities are rare in the public setting and goniometer usage is known to be low, thus, visual estimates are the primary form of radiographic assessment. Previous research associated orthopaedic experience with accuracy of distal radius fracture parameter estimation but, oftentimes, doctors treating orthopaedic patients are not experienced in orthopaedics.

A cross-sectional questionnaire including four distal radius fracture radiographs administered to 149 orthopaedic doctors at three Johannesburg teaching hospitals. Participants grouped into ranks of: consultants (n=36), registrars (n=41), medical officers (n=20) and interns (n=52). Participants visually estimated values of distal radius fracture parameters, stated whether they would accept the position of the fractures and stated their percentage of routine usage of goniometers in real practice.

The registrar group was most accurate in visually estimating radial height, whilst the interns were least accurate (p=0.0237). The consultant, registrar and medical officer groups were equally accurate in estimating radial inclination whilst the intern group was the least accurate (p<0.0001). The consultant and registrar group were equally accurate at estimating volar tilt, whilst the medical officer and intern groups were least accurate (p<0.0001). The Gwet's AC agreement was 0.1612 (p=0.047) for acceptance of position of the first radiograph, 0.8768 (p<0.0001) for the second, 0.8884 (p<0.0001) for the third and 0.8064 (p<0.0001) for the fourth. All groups showed no difference in goniometer usage, using them largely 0–25% of practice (p=0.1937).

The study found that accuracy in visual estimations of distal radius fracture parameters was linked to orthopaedic experience but not linked to routine practice goniometer usage, which was minimal across all groups. Inter-rater agreement on acceptability of fracture position is potentially dependent on severity of deviation from acceptable parameters.


Email: