Reproducibility of Two Novel Bone Defect Classification Systems

OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility of two novel bone defect classification systems, the Tetsworth classification system and the Universal Long Bone Defect (ULBD) classification system. METHODS: Two independent reproducibility studies were undertaken. A series of cases with bone defects was collected and sent to a panel of orthopaedic surgeons who were members of the OTA or LLRS who routinely manage bone defects. The surgeons were provided with a measurement calibration scale for defect length assessment. Analysis of reproducibility was performed using a Fleiss's multi rater kappa model, where a Fleiss's kappa of 0 indicated agreement no better than random chance, and 1 indicated perfect agreement. Surgeons also rated their confidence in their rating from 1 - 3, with 3 as "very confident." RESULTS: For the Tetsworth classification, Fleiss' kappa was 0.264 for the overall classification system (fair agreement) (95% CI 0.224,0.305). The kappa for the D1,D2,D3 part of the code related to defect completeness (incomplete, subcritical, or critical) was 0.557 (moderate agreement) (95%CI 0.446, 0.648). The kappa for the A,B,C part of the code related to defect shape was 0.402 (moderate agreement) (95% CI 0.323, 0.480). The mean confidence for all cases was 2.46 (range 1.86 - 3). For the ULBD classification, the Fleiss' kappa for the entire classification was 0.133 (slight agreement) (95% CI 0.123,0.144). The kappa for the location and segment was 0.568 (moderate agreement) (95% CI 0.526,0.610). The kappa for the morphology component was 0.124 (slight agreement) (95% CI 0.114, 0.135). The mean confidence for all cases was 2.0 (range 1.0 - 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: The bone defect classification system proposed by Tetsworth et al was reproducible by surgeons familiar with bone defects. The system can be considered for future research use. The ULBD classification system had low overall reproducibility.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2026-05-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/bot.0000000000003225
Primary Topic
Bone fractures and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reproducibility of Two Novel Bone Defect Classification Systems

Brett D. Crist, Julie Agel, Michael Githens, Augustine M. Saiz et al.
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Bone fractures and treatments
article

Reproducibility of Two Novel Bone Defect Classification Systems

Brett D. Crist, Julie Agel, Michael Githens, Augustine M. Saiz, Ashley E. Levack, Roberto Hernández‐Irizarry, Preston Lee, M T Marmor, Mitchell Bernstein, Stephen Quinnan, Stephen J. Shymon, Eric Meinberg, Stephen J. Wallace, Sean T. Campbell, Geoffrey S. Marecek
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the reproducibility of two novel bone defect classification systems, the Tetsworth classification system and the Universal Long Bone Defect (ULBD) classification system. METHODS: Two independent reproducibility studies were undertaken. A series of cases with bone defects was collected and sent to a panel of orthopaedic surgeons who were members of the OTA or LLRS who routinely manage bone defects. The surgeons were provided with a measurement calibration scale for defect length assessment. Analysis of reproducibility was performed using a Fleiss's multi rater kappa model, where a Fleiss's kappa of 0 indicated agreement no better than random chance, and 1 indicated perfect agreement. Surgeons also rated their confidence in their rating from 1 - 3, with 3 as "very confident." RESULTS: For the Tetsworth classification, Fleiss' kappa was 0.264 for the overall classification system (fair agreement) (95% CI 0.224,0.305). The kappa for the D1,D2,D3 part of the code related to defect completeness (incomplete, subcritical, or critical) was 0.557 (moderate agreement) (95%CI 0.446, 0.648). The kappa for the A,B,C part of the code related to defect shape was 0.402 (moderate agreement) (95% CI 0.323, 0.480). The mean confidence for all cases was 2.46 (range 1.86 - 3). For the ULBD classification, the Fleiss' kappa for the entire classification was 0.133 (slight agreement) (95% CI 0.123,0.144). The kappa for the location and segment was 0.568 (moderate agreement) (95% CI 0.526,0.610). The kappa for the morphology component was 0.124 (slight agreement) (95% CI 0.114, 0.135). The mean confidence for all cases was 2.0 (range 1.0 - 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: The bone defect classification system proposed by Tetsworth et al was reproducible by surgeons familiar with bone defects. The system can be considered for future research use. The ULBD classification system had low overall reproducibility.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US), University of Minnesota (US), Loyola University Medical Center (US), Emory University (US), University of California, San Francisco (US), West Coast University (US), McGill University Health Centre (CA), Harborview Medical Center (US), St. Mary's Medical Center (US), Harbor–UCLA Medical Center (US), HealthPartners (US), University of Missouri (US), University of California, Davis (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Bone fractures and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.