| Objective:To compare the intra-observer reproducibility and inter-observer reliability regarding the results of AO and Frykman classification systems for distal radius fracture.Methods:Five intern of orthopedics and three attending physician of orthopedics independently measured the X ray films of 100 DRF patients using both AO and Frykman classification systems. Two weeks later. Five intern of orthopedics and three attending physician of orthopedics repeated the same classification process. No measurement trace was allowed to be left on the X ray films. SPSS software was used to calculate the Kappa values and analyze the intra—observer reproducibility and inter-observer reliability.Results:The overall reliability and reproducibility rates of the AO classification system which were made by five intern of orthopedics were 64%(Kappa value= 0.627) and 63.6%(Kappa value=0.619) respectively, the reliability and reproducibility rates of Frykman classification system were 72.3%(Kappa value= 0.718) and 73.2% (Kappa value= 0.721) respectively, The overall reliability and reproducibility rates of the AO classification system which were made by three attending physician of orthopedics were 80.6%(Kappa value =0.778) and 85%(Kappa value=0.836) respectively, the reliability and reproducibility rates of Frykman classification system were 78%(Kappa value= 0.763) and 84%(Kappa value= 0.826) respectively.Conclusion:Both AO and Frykman classification systems are all-round. The reliability and reproducibility rates of Frykman classification systems were better than AO classification system. Moreover, Frykman classification system being easier to understand and more meaningful for doctors, consists of less classification types. so it causes less dissension in clinical treatment. However, neither AO nor Frykman classification system tells details of the degree of fracture displacement. Therefore, Frykman classification system is useful to guide the orthopedic of TCM manipulations applied to treat DRF. |