TY - JOUR

T1 - Low inter-observer agreement among experienced shoulder surgeons assessing overstuffing of glenohumeral resurfacing hemiarthroplasty based on plain radiographs

AU - Sandau, Nicolai

AU - Brorson, Stig

AU - Olsen, Bo S

AU - Sørensen, Anne Kathrine

AU - Jensen, Steen L

AU - Schantz, Kim

AU - Ovesen, Janne

AU - Rasmussen, Jeppe V

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - BACKGROUND: In a clinical setting, a visual evaluation of post-implant radiographs is often used to assess the restoration of glenohumeral joint anatomy after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty and is a part of the decision-making process, in combination with other parameters, when evaluating patients with inferior clinical results. However, the reliability of this method of visual evaluation has not been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the inter- and intra-observer agreement among experienced shoulder surgeons assessing overstuffing, implant positioning, and size following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty using plain standardized radiographs.METHODS: Six experienced shoulder surgeons independently classified implant inclination, size of the implant and if the joint seemed overstuffed, in 219 cases of post-implant radiographs. All cases were classified twice 3 weeks apart. Only radiographs with an anterior-posterior projection with a freely visible joint space were used. Non-weighted Cohen's kappa values were calculated for each coder pair and the mean used as an estimate of the overall inter-observer agreement.RESULTS: The overall inter-observer agreement for implant size (kappa, 0.48 and 0.41) and inclination angle was moderate in both rounds (kappa, 0.46 and 0.44), but only a fair agreement was found concerning the evaluation for stuffing of the joint (kappa, 0.24 and 0.28). Intra-observer agreement for implant size and stuffing ranged from fair to substantial while the agreement for inclination was moderate to substantial.CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a visual evaluation of plain radiographs may be inadequate to evaluate overstuffing, implant positioning, and size following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty using plain standardized radiographs. Future studies may contribute to elucidate whether reliability increases if consensus on clear definitions and standardized methods of evaluation is made.

AB - BACKGROUND: In a clinical setting, a visual evaluation of post-implant radiographs is often used to assess the restoration of glenohumeral joint anatomy after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty and is a part of the decision-making process, in combination with other parameters, when evaluating patients with inferior clinical results. However, the reliability of this method of visual evaluation has not been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the inter- and intra-observer agreement among experienced shoulder surgeons assessing overstuffing, implant positioning, and size following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty using plain standardized radiographs.METHODS: Six experienced shoulder surgeons independently classified implant inclination, size of the implant and if the joint seemed overstuffed, in 219 cases of post-implant radiographs. All cases were classified twice 3 weeks apart. Only radiographs with an anterior-posterior projection with a freely visible joint space were used. Non-weighted Cohen's kappa values were calculated for each coder pair and the mean used as an estimate of the overall inter-observer agreement.RESULTS: The overall inter-observer agreement for implant size (kappa, 0.48 and 0.41) and inclination angle was moderate in both rounds (kappa, 0.46 and 0.44), but only a fair agreement was found concerning the evaluation for stuffing of the joint (kappa, 0.24 and 0.28). Intra-observer agreement for implant size and stuffing ranged from fair to substantial while the agreement for inclination was moderate to substantial.CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a visual evaluation of plain radiographs may be inadequate to evaluate overstuffing, implant positioning, and size following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty using plain standardized radiographs. Future studies may contribute to elucidate whether reliability increases if consensus on clear definitions and standardized methods of evaluation is made.

KW - Clinical Competence/standards

KW - Clinical Decision-Making/methods

KW - Hemiarthroplasty/instrumentation

KW - Humans

KW - Observer Variation

KW - Prosthesis Design/methods

KW - Radiography/methods

KW - Reproducibility of Results

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Shoulder/diagnostic imaging

KW - Shoulder Joint/diagnostic imaging

KW - Shoulder Prosthesis/standards

KW - Surgeons/psychology

U2 - 10.1186/s13018-018-1008-6

DO - 10.1186/s13018-018-1008-6

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30482217

VL - 13

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

SN - 1749-799X

M1 - 299

ER -