ArticleJSES international2024
The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures is useful to identify patients who may require treatment with hemi- or total elbow arthroplasty.
Article in JSES international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Classification systems are only useful if there is agreement among observers. The purpose of this study is to introduce a simple and clinically applicable classification system - The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures (CCDHF) and to compare the interobserver and intraobserver agreement for this classification with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA), and the Sheffield classification systems. The primary objective of the new classification system is to distinguish fractures that may not be suitable for open reduction and internal fixation, necessitating treatment options such as elbow hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Methods: Five consultant elbow surgeons assessed a consecutive series of 105 sets X-rays of distal humeral fractures on 2 occasions with at least 10 weeks interval. All X-rays were classified according to AO/OTA, Sheffield, and the CCDHF systems. The CCDHF system has been developed collaboratively by a panel of five experienced elbow surgeons. Based on consensus, the surgeons identified specific fracture characteristics where elbow hemiarthroplasty or TEA might be needed. Results: The mean interobserver agreement was fair for AO/OTA and moderate for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The mean intraobserver agreement was moderate for AO/OTA and substantial for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The observers were uncertain about the classification in 29% of the cases with the AO/OTA classification, 15% with the Sheffield classification, and 12% with CCDHF. Conclusion: The CCDHF demonstrated validity and clinical applicability and can assist surgeons in identifying fractures that may require hemiarthroplasty or TEA treatment.
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.