143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10963156)
1. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in classification systems for fractures of the distal humerus.
Wainwright AM; Williams JR; Carr AJ
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2000 Jul; 82(5):636-42. PubMed ID: 10963156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A clinically applicable fracture classification for distal humeral fractures.
Davies MB; Stanley D
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2006; 15(5):602-8. PubMed ID: 16979057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reliability and Reproducibility of the OTA/AO Classification for Humeral Shaft Fractures.
Mahabier KC; Van Lieshout EM; Van Der Schaaf BC; Roukema GR; Punt BJ; Verhofstad MH; Den Hartog D
J Orthop Trauma; 2017 Mar; 31(3):e75-e80. PubMed ID: 27755334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humeral fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy.
Doornberg J; Lindenhovius A; Kloen P; van Dijk CN; Zurakowski D; Ring D
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2006 Aug; 88(8):1795-801. PubMed ID: 16882904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Classification of distal radius fractures: an analysis of interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility.
Andersen DJ; Blair WF; Steyers CM; Adams BD; el-Khouri GY; Brandser EA
J Hand Surg Am; 1996 Jul; 21(4):574-82. PubMed ID: 8842946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliability and reproducibility of the new AO/OTA 2018 classification system for proximal humeral fractures: a comparison of three different classification systems.
Marongiu G; Leinardi L; Congia S; Frigau L; Mola F; Capone A
J Orthop Traumatol; 2020 Mar; 21(1):4. PubMed ID: 32166457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability of the Anterior Humeral Line Index Compared With the Gartland Classification for Posteriorly Hinged Supracondylar Humerus Fractures.
Murphy-Zane MS; Pyle L
Orthopedics; 2018 Jul; 41(4):e502-e505. PubMed ID: 29708571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Distal Humerus Traction Radiographs: Is the Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability Comparable With Computed Tomography?
Galloway JD; Shymon SJ; Adams MR; Reilly MC; Sirkin MS; Hreha J; Jung MT; Madi N; Siracuse BL; Ahmed I; Vosbikian MM
J Orthop Trauma; 2022 Jul; 36(7):e265-e270. PubMed ID: 34924510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Poor reproducibility of classification of proximal humeral fractures. Additional CT of minor value.
Sjödén GO; Movin T; Güntner P; Aspelin P; Ahrengart L; Ersmark H; Sperber A
Acta Orthop Scand; 1997 Jun; 68(3):239-42. PubMed ID: 9246984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reliability of a modified Gartland classification of supracondylar humerus fractures.
Barton KL; Kaminsky CK; Green DW; Shean CJ; Kautz SM; Skaggs DL
J Pediatr Orthop; 2001; 21(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 11176349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Interobserver agreement of Neer and AO classifications for proximal humeral fractures.
Papakonstantinou MK; Hart MJ; Farrugia R; Gabbe BJ; Kamali Moaveni A; van Bavel D; Page RS; Richardson MD
ANZ J Surg; 2016 Apr; 86(4):280-4. PubMed ID: 26887373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reliability of Current Classification Systems for Periprosthetic Fractures of the Humerus.
Auran RL; Tran TL; Dehghan N; McKee MD; Lederman ES
J Orthop Trauma; 2023 Feb; 37(2):83-88. PubMed ID: 36155598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Impact of Three-Dimensional CT Imaging on Intraobserver and Interobserver Reliability of Proximal Humeral Fracture Classifications and Treatment Recommendations.
Berkes MB; Dines JS; Little MT; Garner MR; Shifflett GD; Lazaro LE; Wellman DS; Dines DM; Lorich DG
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2014 Aug; 96(15):1281-1286. PubMed ID: 25100775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does the Modified Gartland Classification Clarify Decision Making?
Leung S; Paryavi E; Herman MJ; Sponseller PD; Abzug JM
J Pediatr Orthop; 2018 Jan; 38(1):22-26. PubMed ID: 26974527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of two classification systems for intra-articular calcaneal fractures.
Lauder AJ; Inda DJ; Bott AM; Clare MP; Fitzgibbons TC; Mormino MA
Foot Ankle Int; 2006 Apr; 27(4):251-5. PubMed ID: 16624214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Distal radius fractures are difficult to classify.
Wæver D; Madsen ML; Rölfing JHD; Borris LC; Henriksen M; Nagel LL; Thorninger R
Injury; 2018 Jun; 49 Suppl 1():S29-S32. PubMed ID: 29929689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of simplified Frykman and AO classifications of fractures of the distal radius. Assessment of interobserver and intraobserver agreement.
Illarramendi A; González Della Valle A; Segal E; De Carli P; Maignon G; Gallucci G
Int Orthop; 1998; 22(2):111-5. PubMed ID: 9651777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of the AO/ASIF fracture classification for the distal tibia.
Martin JS; Marsh JL; Bonar SK; DeCoster TA; Found EM; Brandser EA
J Orthop Trauma; 1997 Oct; 11(7):477-83. PubMed ID: 9334948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reliability and necessity of computerized tomography in distal tibial physeal injuries.
Thawrani D; Kuester V; Gabos PG; Kruse RW; Littleton AG; Rogers KJ; Holmes L; Thacker MM
J Pediatr Orthop; 2011; 31(7):745-50. PubMed ID: 21926871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Interobserver reliability of classification and characterization of proximal humeral fractures: a comparison of two and three-dimensional CT.
Bruinsma WE; Guitton TG; Warner JJ; Ring D;
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Sep; 95(17):1600-4. PubMed ID: 24005201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
