Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
The Bone & Joint Journal

Trauma
Dates
Year From

Year To
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 3 | Pages 420 - 424
1 Mar 2016
Wordsworth M Lawton G Nathwani D Pearse M Naique S Dodds A Donaldson H Bhattacharya R Jain A Simmons J Hettiaratchy S

Aims

The management of open lower limb fractures in the United Kingdom has evolved over the last ten years with the introduction of major trauma networks (MTNs), the publication of standards of care and the wide acceptance of a combined orthopaedic and plastic surgical approach to management. The aims of this study were to report recent changes in outcome of open tibial fractures following the implementation of these changes.

Patients and Methods

Data on all patients with an open tibial fracture presenting to a major trauma centre between 2011 and 2012 were collected prospectively. The treatment and outcomes of the 65 Gustilo Anderson Grade III B tibial fractures were compared with historical data from the same unit.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 2 | Pages 205 - 208
1 Feb 2005
Bhattacharya R Vassan UT Finn P Port A

Our study was undertaken to assess the inter- and intra-observer variability of the classification system of Sanders for calcaneal fractures. Five consultant orthopaedic surgeons with different subspecialty interests classified CT scans of 28 calcaneal fractures using this classification system. After six months, they reclassified the scans.

Kappa statistics were used to analyse the two groups. The interobserver variability of the classification system was 0.32 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.38). The subclasses were then combined and assessment of agreement between the general classes as a whole gave a kappa value of 0.33 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.41). The mean kappa value for intra-observer variability of the classification system was 0.42 (95% CI 0.22 to 0.62). When the subclasses were combined, it was 0.45 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.65).

Our results show that, despite its popularity, the classification system of Sanders has only fair agreement among users.