Research Article| Volume 41, ISSUE 4, P377-381, April 2010

The comparison of two classifications for trochanteric femur fractures: The AO/ASIF classification and the Jensen classification


      This study compares the reproducibility of two classifications for trochanteric femur fractures: the Jensen classification and the AO/ASIF classification. Furthermore we evaluated the agreement on fracture stability, choice of osteosynthesis, fracture reduction and the accuracy of implant positioning.
      In order to calculate the inter-, and intra-observer variability 10 observers classified 50 trochanteric fractures.
      The inter-observer agreement of the AO/ASIF classification and the Jensen classification was κ0.40 and κ0.48. The kappa coefficient of the intra-observer reliability of the AO/ASIF classification was κ0.43 and κ0.56 for the Jensen classification.
      Preoperative agreement on fracture stability and type of implant showed kappa values of κ0.39 and κ0.65. The postoperative agreement on choice of implant, fracture reduction and position of the implant was κ0.17, κ0.29 and κ0.22, respectively.
      Both classifications showed poor reproducibility. This study suggests that the definition of stability of trochanteric fractures remains controversial, which possibly complicates the choice of osteosynthesis.


      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 to Injury
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Andersen E.
        • Jorgensen L.G.
        • Hededam L.T.
        Evans’ classification of trochanteric fractures: an assessment of the interobserver and intraobserver reliability.
        Injury. 1990; 21: 377-378
        • Beaule P.E.
        • Dorey F.J.
        • Matta J.M.
        Letournel classification for acetabular fractures. Assessment of interobserver and intraobserver reliability.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A: 1704-1709
        • Chan P.S.
        • Klimkiewicz J.J.
        • Luchetti W.T.
        • et al.
        Impact of CT scan on treatment plan and fracture classification of tibial plateau fractures.
        J Orthop Trauma. 1997; 11: 484-489
        • De Boeck H.
        Classification of hip fractures.
        Acta Orthop Belg. 1994; 60: 106-109
        • Dimon J.H.
        • Hughston J.C.
        Unstable intertrochanteric fractures of the hip.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1967; 49: 440-450
        • Doornberg J.
        • Lindenhovius A.
        • Kloen P.
        • et al.
        Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humeral fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88: 1795-1801
        • Evans E.M.
        The treatment of trochanteric fractures of the femur.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1949; 31B: 190-203
        • Fleiss J.L.
        Statistical methods for rates and proportions.
        John Wiley and Sons, New York1981
        • Gehrchen P.M.
        • Nielsen J.O.
        • Olesen B.
        Poor reproducibility of Evans’ classification of the trochanteric fracture. Assessment of 4 observers in 52 cases.
        Acta Orthop Scand. 1993; 64: 71-72
        • Gotfried Y.
        The lateral trochanteric wall: a key element in the reconstruction of unstable pertrochanteric hip fractures.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; : 82-86
        • Haapamaki V.V.
        • Kiuru M.J.
        • Koskinen S.K.
        Ankle and foot injuries: analysis of MDCT findings.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 615-622
        • Haidukewych G.J.
        • Israel T.A.
        • Berry D.J.
        Reverse obliquity fractures of the intertrochanteric region of the femur.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83-A: 643-650
        • Hardy D.C.
        • Descamps P.Y.
        • Krallis P.
        • et al.
        Use of an intramedullary hip-screw compared with a compression hip-screw with a plate for intertrochanteric femoral fractures. A prospective, randomized study of one hundred patients.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80: 618-630
        • Humphrey C.A.
        • Dirschl D.R.
        • Ellis T.J.
        Interobserver reliability of a CT-based fracture classification system.
        J Orthop Trauma. 2005; 19: 616-622
        • Jensen J.S.
        Classification of trochanteric fractures.
        Acta Orthop Scand. 1980; 51: 803-810
        • Jin W.J.
        • Dai L.Y.
        • Cui Y.M.
        • et al.
        Reliability of classification systems for intertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur in experienced orthopaedic surgeons.
        Injury. 2005; 36: 858-861
        • Kreder H.J.
        • Hanel D.P.
        • McKee M.
        • et al.
        Consistency of AO fracture classification for the distal radius.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996; 78: 726-731
        • Landis J.R.
        • Koch G.G.
        The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.
        Biometrics. 1977; 33: 159-174
        • Martin J.S.
        • Marsh J.L.
        Current classification of fractures. Rationale and utility.
        Radiol Clin North Am. 1997; 35: 491-506
        • Michaelsson K.
        • Weiderpass E.
        • Farahmand B.Y.
        • et al.
        Differences in risk factor patterns between cervical and trochanteric hip fractures. Swedish Hip Fracture Study Group.
        Osteoporos Int. 1999; 10: 487-494
        • Muller M.E.
        • Nazarian S.
        • Koch P.
        • Schatzker J.
        The comprehensive classification of fractures of the long bones.
        Springer, Berlin1990
        • Mustonen A.O.
        • Koskinen S.K.
        • Kiuru M.J.
        Acute knee trauma: analysis of multidetector computed tomography findings and comparison with conventional radiography.
        Acta Radiol. 2005; 46: 866-874
        • Palm H.
        • Jacobsen S.
        • Sonne-Holm S.
        • Gebuhr P.
        Integrity of the lateral femoral wall in intertrochanteric hip fractures: an important predictor of a reoperation.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 470-475
        • Parker M.J.
        • Handoll H.H.
        Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures in adults.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005; (CD000093)
        • Pervez H.
        • Parker M.J.
        • Pryor G.A.
        • et al.
        Classification of trochanteric fracture of the proximal femur: a study of the reliability of current systems.
        Injury. 2002; 33: 713-715
        • Sadowski C.
        • Lubbeke A.
        • Saudan M.
        • et al.
        Treatment of reverse oblique and transverse intertrochanteric fractures with use of an intramedullary nail or a 95 degrees screw-plate: a prospective, randomized study.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002; 84-A: 372-381
        • Sarmiento A.
        • Williams E.M.
        The unstable intertrochanteric fracture: treatment with a valgus osteotomy and I-beam nail-plate. A preliminary report of one hundred cases.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1970; 52: 1309-1318
        • Schipper I.B.
        • Steyerberg E.W.
        • Castelein R.M.
        • van Vugt A.B.
        Reliability of the AO/ASIF classification for pertrochanteric femoral fractures.
        Acta Orthop Scand. 2001; 72: 36-41