ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2024
Comparing the Interobserver Reliability of 4 Methods Used to Measure Knee Laxity on Coronal Plane Stress Radiograph.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A simplified algorithm to work up graft re-rupture following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Varus and valgus knee stress radiographs provide valuable information in the pre- and postoperative evaluation of joint laxity in patients with multiligament knee injuries (MLKIs). Purpose: To review the literature for described techniques of quantifying laxity on coronal stress radiographs of the knee and identify the most reliable method. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A thorough literature search using the MEDLINE and Embase databases identified 4 studies with distinct methods for objectively measuring laxity on varus and valgus stress radiographs: Heesterbeek et al (2008), Jacobsen (1976), LaPrade et al (2004), and Sawant et al (2004). To compare these methods, 200 coronal plane stress radiographs from 50 patients with MLKIs were retrospectively reviewed from an MLKI database at a single institution. The amount of varus and valgus laxity on each radiograph was measured independently by 4 reviewers using each method. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% CIs were calculated to assess the interobserver reliability of each method overall and the varus and valgus measurements individually. Results: For all 4 methods, the overall interobserver reliability was considered at least moderate. The method by Heesterbeek et al proved to have the highest interrater reliability in all domains-overall (ICC, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.85-0.90]), valgus (ICC, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.78-0.88]), and varus (ICC, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90])-demonstrating good to excellent reliability both overall and in varus measurements and showing good reliability in valgus measurements. The method by Sawant et al demonstrated good reliability in valgus measurements. All other measures demonstrated moderate reliability. Conclusion: Available methods for measuring knee joint laxity on varus and valgus knee stress radiographs in patients with MLKIs demonstrated moderate to good interobserver reliability. The method described by Heesterbeek et al proved to have the highest reliability overall as well as in measurements on varus and valgus views individually.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.