Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Bone shortening of clavicular fractures: comparison of measurement methods

Authors: A. H. Thorsmark, P. Muhareb Udby, I. Ban, L. H. Frich

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The indication for operative treatment of clavicular fractures with bone shortening over 2 cm is much debated. Correct measurement of clavicular length is essential, and reliable measures of clavicular length are therefore highly requested by clinical decision-makers. The aim of this study was to investigate if three commonly scientifically used measurement methods were interchangeable to each other.

Methods

A retrospective study using radiographs collected as part of a previous study on clavicular fractures. Two independent raters measured clavicle shortening on 60 patients using conventional radiographs on two separate sessions. The two measurement methods described by Hill et al. and Silva et al. were used on unilateral pictures. Side difference measurements according to Lazarides et al. were made on panoramic radiographs. The measurements were analyzed using intraclass correlation, Weir’s protocol for Standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC), and Bland-Altman plots.

Results

None of the methods were directly interchangeable. The side difference method by Lazarides et al. was the most reliable of the three methods, but had a high proportion of post-fracture bone lengthening that indicated methodological problems. The Hill et al. and Silva et al. methods had high minimal detectable change, making their use unreliable.

Conclusion

As all three measurement methods had either reliability or methodological issues, we found it likely that differences in measurement methods have caused the differences in clavicular length observed in scientific studies.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:476–84.CrossRefPubMed Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:476–84.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Eskola A, Vainionpää S, Myllynen P, et al. Outcome of clavicular fracture in 89 patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1986;105:337–8.CrossRefPubMed Eskola A, Vainionpää S, Myllynen P, et al. Outcome of clavicular fracture in 89 patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1986;105:337–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Hill J, McGuire M, Crosby L. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79:537–9.CrossRefPubMed Hill J, McGuire M, Crosby L. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79:537–9.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Wick M, Müller EJ, Kollig E, Muhr G. Midshaft fractures of the clavicle with a shortening of more than 2 cm predispose to nonunion. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001;121:207–11.CrossRefPubMed Wick M, Müller EJ, Kollig E, Muhr G. Midshaft fractures of the clavicle with a shortening of more than 2 cm predispose to nonunion. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001;121:207–11.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
9.
go back to reference Thormodsgard TM, Stone K, Ciraulo DL, et al. An assessment of patient satisfaction with nonoperative management of clavicular fractures using the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure. J Trauma. 2011;71:1126–9. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e3182396541.CrossRefPubMed Thormodsgard TM, Stone K, Ciraulo DL, et al. An assessment of patient satisfaction with nonoperative management of clavicular fractures using the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure. J Trauma. 2011;71:1126–9. doi:10.​1097/​TA.​0b013e3182396541​.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Oroko PK, Buchan M, Winkler A, Kelly IG. Does shortening matter after clavicular fractures? Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 1999;58:6–8.PubMed Oroko PK, Buchan M, Winkler A, Kelly IG. Does shortening matter after clavicular fractures? Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 1999;58:6–8.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Figueiredo GS de L, Tamaoki MJS, Dragone B, et al. Correlation of the degree of clavicle shortening after non-surgical treatment of midshaft fractures with upper limb function. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16:151. doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0585-3.CrossRef Figueiredo GS de L, Tamaoki MJS, Dragone B, et al. Correlation of the degree of clavicle shortening after non-surgical treatment of midshaft fractures with upper limb function. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16:151. doi:10.​1186/​s12891-015-0585-3.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference McCormick WF, Stewart JH, Greene H. Sexing of human clavicles using length and circumference measurements. Am J forensic Med Pathol Off Publ Natl Assoc Med Exam. 1991;12:175–81.CrossRef McCormick WF, Stewart JH, Greene H. Sexing of human clavicles using length and circumference measurements. Am J forensic Med Pathol Off Publ Natl Assoc Med Exam. 1991;12:175–81.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J strength Cond Res. 2005;19:231–40.PubMed Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J strength Cond Res. 2005;19:231–40.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.CrossRefPubMed Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Bone shortening of clavicular fractures: comparison of measurement methods
Authors
A. H. Thorsmark
P. Muhareb Udby
I. Ban
L. H. Frich
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1881-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2017 Go to the issue