Title |
Does the META score evaluating osteoporotic and metastatic vertebral fractures have enough agreement to be used by orthopaedic surgeons with different levels of training?
|
---|---|
Published in |
European Spine Journal, July 2018
|
DOI | 10.1007/s00586-018-5694-x |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Julio Urrutia, Pablo Besa, Sergio Morales, Antonio Parlange, Sebastian Flores, Mauricio Campos, Sebastian Mobarec |
Abstract |
Differentiating osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVF) from metastatic vertebral fractures (MVF) is difficult. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based score (META score) aiming to differentiate OVF and MVF was recently published; however, an independent agreement assessment is required before the score is used. We performed such independent agreement evaluation, including raters with different levels of training. Sixty-four patients with confirmed OVF or MVF were evaluated by six raters (three spine surgeons and three orthopaedic residents) using the META score. We used the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) to evaluate inter- and intra-observer agreement and the kappa statistic (κ) to determine the agreement for individual score criteria. We calculated the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) to establish the score accuracy. The inter-observer agreement was poor [ICC = 0.22 (0.12-0.33)]; spine surgeons [ICC = 0.75 (0.66-0.83)] had better agreement than that of residents [ICC = 0.06 (- 0.07 to 0.23)]. The intra-observer agreement was poor [ICC = 0.15 (- 0.04 to 0.30)]; both spine surgeons [ICC = 0.21 (0.05-0.41)] and residents exhibited poor agreement [ICC = - 0.06 (- 0.40 to 0.20)]. The agreement for each specific criterion varied from κ = 0.24 to κ = 0.38. The AUC was 0.57 (0.64 for spine surgeons and 0.51 for residents, p < 0.01). The inter-observer agreement using the META score was adequate for spine surgeons but not for residents; the intra-observer agreement was poor. These results do not support the standard use of the META score to differentiate OVF and MVF. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
France | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 25% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 17% |
Unknown | 7 | 58% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 33% |
Neuroscience | 1 | 8% |
Unknown | 7 | 58% |