Modern views on the classification of articular system

Based on the experience of teaching human anatomy at domestic and foreign universities (Cuba, Ethiopia, Afghanistan), the staff of the Department of Human Anatomy, Operative Surgery and Topographic Anatomy of ZSMPhU note that the articular system is a complex section not only for students, but also for teaching. This is due to a number of reasons, the main of which is the difficulty of understanding the classification of bony joints and some imperfection of anatomical terminology. This is especially true of the bony joints and, above all, related to the poorly understood Latin, Ukrainian and English names. Even more misunderstandings in anatomical literature with biomechanical terms. For example, most authors believe that only the three joints are multi -axial, but also in two -way joints, except for the two main axes, as in the three, there are many intermediate axes, which makes it possible to circumduction. That is why the article, based on modern data on Articular system and taking into account the latest anatomical terminology, attempts to systematize and classify Joints. The purpose of the study was based on the analysis of different editions of international anatomical terminology, modern domestic and foreign anatomical literature to develop the classification of bone compounds, taking into account their anatomical and biomechanical characteristics. Methods and Materials: The search and selection of scientific literature for systematic review was conducted by the authors independently in the databases of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane in keywords in full texts of articles in English and Ukrainian according to the results of research with the level of evidence I - III. In the analysis of international anatomical terminologies, as well as modern anatomical Ukrainian and foreign literature, it is established that there is no clear classification of connections. Every five years, the International Nomenclature Committee changes the name of some structures; some cancels, and then returns to the previous ones, which makes some confusion in their understanding. In domestic textbooks and atlases from Human Anatomy, the classification of bone connections is used, which was developed in the middle of the last century, but it does not correspond to modern views. It should be noted that in most textbooks and terminology, FIPAT is distinguished by the shape of the joint surfaces: hinge, pivot, bicondylar, saddle, ellipsoid joint, plane and spheroidal (ball and socket) joints, but functional division into uniaxial and multiaxial, joints involved in isokinetic movements and variable kinematics. Given the anatomical and biomechanical (functional) features of joints, modern approaches to the use of anatomical nomenclature, the views of domestic and foreign authors, the classification of joints was developed and proposed for consideration. In the process of analysis of Ukrainian and international anatomical terminology and nomenclature, as well as domestic and foreign textbooks, no clear anatomical classification of bone connections was found. Furthermore, the analysis highlights a specific mismatch between the anatomical terminology and the organization of the joints. It should be noted that modern domestic views on the classification of bony joints are significantly different from foreign ones.