Study Design:Reliability analysis.Objectives:The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) was developed for assessing patients with spinal neoplasia. It identifies patients who may benefit from surgical consultation or intervention. It also acts as a prognostic tool for surgical decision making. Reliability of SINS has been established for spine surgeons, radiologists, and radiation oncologists, but not yet among spine surgery trainees. The purpose of our study is to determine the reliability of SINS among spine residents and fellows, and its role as an educational tool.Methods:Twenty-three residents and 2 spine fellows independently scored 30 de-identified spine tumor cases on 2 occasions, at least 6 weeks apart. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) measured interobserver and intraobserver agreement for total SINS scores. Fleiss’s kappa and Cohen’s kappa analysis evaluated interobserver and intraobserver agreement of 6 component subscores (location, pain, bone lesion quality, spinal alignment, vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral involvement of spinal elements).Results:Total SINS scores showed near perfect interobserver (0.990) and intraobserver (0.907) agreement. Fleiss’s kappa statistics revealed near perfect agreement for location; substantial for pain; moderate for alignment, vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral involvement; and fair for bone quality (0.948, 0.739, 0.427, 0.550, 0.435, and 0.382). Cohen’s kappa statistics revealed near perfect agreement for location and pain, substantial for alignment and vertebral body collapse, and moderate for bone quality and posterolateral involvement (0.954, 0.814, 0.610, 0.671, 0.576, and 0.561, respectively).Conclusions:The SINS is a reliable and valuable educational tool for spine fellows and residents learning to judge spinal instability.

The successful treatment of sdAVF requires a detailed understanding of clinical presentation and imaging findings to allow for precise treatment. Owing to the rarity of the condition, clinicians must continue to share their experiences to advance our knowledge.

No abstract

Background: For the management of distal radius fractures, surgical decision-making depends on radiographic measurements of indicators including radial inclination (RI), ulnar variance (UV) and radial tilt (RT). Evaluation of the inter-and intrarater reliability of surgeons' measurements of these criteria has been limited.Methods: Twelve physicians were invited to participate in this study. Anonymously, they measured RI, UV and RT on 30 digitally stored radiographs of distal radius fractures on 3 occasions, each at least 1 week apart, using online measuring tools. After taking the third set of measurements, the participants were given a tutorial by the senior author (G.J.) on a single technique to measure all 3 indicators. The partici pants then took 3 more sets of measurements using only the technique they had been taught. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to evaluate interrater reliability each week. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate the effect of the tutorial, controlling for week of study along with reader (participant) and patient variance. Results:The ICCs indicated that the participants' measurement precision improved promptly after the tutorial, and this improvement was sustained through subsequent readings. The odds of an "accurate" measurement (within 2° of the senior author's measurements for RI, 1 mm for UV and 4° for RT) was 1.7 times higher for RI, 2.7 times higher for UV and 2.3 times higher for RT after the tutorial; all of these results were statistically significant. Conclusion:Surgeons ought to be familiar with a method to reproducibly measure the indicators used in the published guidelines for surgical intervention. The tutorial on a single standardized technique for online measurement of RI, UV and RT in distal radius fractures improved measurement precision.Contexte : Pour la prise en charge des fractures du radius distal, la prise de décisions chirurgicales dépend de la mesure de plusieurs indicateurs sur les images radiographiques : l'inclinaison radiale (IR), la variance ulnaire (VU) et l'inclinaison sagittale du radius (ISR). La fiabilité interévaluateurs et intra-évaluateur des mesures de ces critères par les chirurgiens a été peu étudiée.Méthodes : Nous avons invité 12 médecins à participer à l'étude. En tout anonymat, ils ont déterminé l'IR, la VU et l'ISR au moyen d'outils de mesure en ligne sur 30 radiographies numérisées de fractures du radius distal. Ils ont répété l'exercice à 3 reprises, à au moins 1 semaine d'intervalle. Après la troisième série, les participants ont suivi un tutoriel de l'auteur principal (G. J.) sur une technique qui peut à elle seule mesurer les 3 indicateurs. Les participants ont ensuite fait 3 autres séries de mesures en utilisant seulement cette technique. Nous avons évalué la fiabilité interévaluateurs pour chaque semaine à partir des coefficients de corrélation intraclasse (CCI). De plus, nous avons calculé l'effet du tutoriel par régression logistique multiple, en tenant compte de la semaine de l'étude et de la varia...

Neuromonitoring is an important adjunct to closed reductions when complete and reliable neurological assessment is not possible.