This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
To evaluate the reproducibility of the interpretation of radiographs for the diagnosis of scaphoid fractures, 134 radiographs (60 consecutive patients) were blindly observed by a resident radiologist, consultant radiologist, resident trauma surgeon and consultant trauma surgeon. The results of radiographs were analysed using kappa (κ) statistics and stratified according to the results of the corresponding bone scan.
In 23 patients the bone scan was positive for fracture of the scaphoid. Irrespective of training and experience, the κ of the comparison of the scores of the radiographs between any two observers did not exceed 40 per cent. After stratification of the outcome of the bone scan, the κ did not increase significantly.
A panel of three experienced observers gave their opinion of all radiographs. The results were compared with the bone scan results. We conclude that radiographs in suspected scaphoid fracture cannot be used as a reliable diagnostic approach because of the low inter-observer agreement in the interpretation, irrespective of the experience and training of the observer.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Injury
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Skeletal scintigraphy of the wrist in suggested scaphoid fractures.Acta Radiol. 1988; 29: 101
- On certain points in the anatomy and mechanism of the wrist joint reviewed in the light of a series of röntgen ray photographs of the living hand.J. Anat. Phys. 1897; 31: 59
- La poignet et les accidents du travail: étude radiographique et clinique. Vitot Freres, Paris1905
- Suspected scaphoid fractures. The value of radiographs.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1990; 72B: 98
- Radiographic signs of union of scaphoid fractures; an analysis of inter-observer agreement and reproducibility.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1988; 70B: 299
- Clinical fracture of the carpal scaphoid — an illusionary diagnosis.J. Hand Surg. 1985; 10B: 375
- Bone scanning in the assessment of fractures of the scaphoid.J. Hand Surg. 1979; 4: 540
- Fractures of the carpal scaphoid in children.Br. J. Surg. 1969; 56: 523
- Scanning and radiology of the carpal scaphoid bone.Acta Orthop. Scand. 1979; 50: 663
- The fractured carpal scaphoid, natural history and factors influencing outcome.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1981; 63B: 225
- The appearance of bone scans following fractures, including immediate and long-term studies.J. Nucl. Med. 1979; 20: 1227
- Fractures of the carpal navicular.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1963; 45A: 82
- Isotope bone imaging in suspected scaphoid trauma.Br. J. Radiol. 1981; 54: 762
- Fractures of the carpal navicular. Importance of special röntgenography.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1939; 41: 1020
- Die Maskierte Fraktur im Röntgenbild und ihr Nachweis durch die Skelettszintigraphie.Radiologie. 1985; 25: 104
- Non-union of carpal scaphoid fractures in children.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1977; 59B: 20
- Fractures of the carpal navicular (scaphoid): a report of 435 cases.J. Bone Joint Surg. 1954; 36A: 998
- Bone scanning of fractures of the scaphoid.J. Hand Surg. 1984; 9B: 189
- Diagnostic problems of scaphoid fractures: the value of radionuclide bone scintigraphy.Neth J. Surg. 1990; 42: 50
- Fractures and pseudo-arthrosis of the scaphoid.Surg. Clin. North Am. 1986; 48: 1083
- Fractures and Joint Injuries. Livingstone, Edinburgh1946 3rd Ed.
- 99mTc-MDP bone scanning of injuries of the carpal scaphoid.Injury. 1988; 19: 14
- Clinical carpal scaphoid injuries.Br. Med. J. 1988; 296: 825
Accepted: April 22, 1991
☆This article should have appeared in conjunction with an Editorial published in Injury, Vol. 22, No. 6 November 1991. The publishers apologize for any inconvenience caused.
© 1992 Published by Elsevier Inc.