Assessment of skeletal age is important in children’s
orthopaedics. We compared two simplified methods used in the assessment
of skeletal age. Both methods have been described previously with
one based on the appearance of the epiphysis at the olecranon and
the other on the digital epiphyses. We also investigated the influence
of assessor experience on applying these two methods. Our investigation was based on the anteroposterior left hand
and lateral elbow radiographs of 44 boys (mean: 14.4; 12.4 to 16.1
) and 78 girls (mean: 13.0; 11.1 to14.9) obtained during the pubertal
growth spurt. A total of nine observers examined the radiographs
with the observers assigned to three groups based on their experience (experienced,
intermediate and novice). These raters were required to determined
skeletal ages twice at six-week intervals. The correlation between
the two methods was determined per assessment and per observer groups. Interclass
correlation coefficients (ICC) evaluated the reproducibility of
the two methods. The overall correlation between the two methods was r = 0.83
for boys and r = 0.84 for girls. The correlation was equal between
first and second assessment, and between the observer groups (r ≥ 0.82).
There was an equally strong ICC for the assessment effect (ICC ≤ 0.4%)
and observer effect (ICC ≤ 3%) for each method. There was no significant
(p <
0.05) difference between the levels of experience. The two methods are equally reliable in assessing skeletal maturity.
The olecranon method offers detailed information during the pubertal
growth spurt, while the digital method is as accurate but less detailed,
making it more useful after the pubertal growth spurt once the olecranon
has ossified. Cite this article:
The ideal treatment for traumatic anterior dislocation
of the shoulder in the skeletally immature patient is controversial.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes after either conservative
and/or surgical treatment using the Latarjet technique. A retrospective
series of 49 out of 80 patients were reviewed. We found no significant differences
between either treatment method regarding functional scores and
pain levels. Although not statistically significant, post-surgical
patients showed better signs of shoulder stability than others who
have a higher rate of recurrence. Further, 92% of the post-surgical
group had returned to the same level of activity Cite this article:
