Bibliographic citations
Chávez, P., (2003). Controversias sobre la clasificación de Gustilo: la clasificación de Aybar es una alternativa? [Tesis de segunda especialidad, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12672/1764
Chávez, P., Controversias sobre la clasificación de Gustilo: la clasificación de Aybar es una alternativa? [Tesis de segunda especialidad]. PE: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos; 2003. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12672/1764
@misc{renati/490075,
title = "Controversias sobre la clasificación de Gustilo: la clasificación de Aybar es una alternativa?",
author = "Chávez Huarcaya, Pablo Ronald",
publisher = "Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos",
year = "2003"
}
There exist different studies, wich the Gustilo classification of fractures, many of them point out the observer variability and the lack uniformity in the diagnostic. The goal of this study was to determine the level of inter and intraobserver diagnostic agreement and the level of understanding of the Gustilo classification and to compared it with Aybar´s classification of open fractures. Method. The study was performed an 38 residents of Orthopaedics and Traumatology of the UNMSM by using a pre and post-test. They were shown X-ray films of open fractures and received information about injuries to the soft tissues. Results. They were analized by Kappa statistical method. The results showed a weak correlation of Gustilo’s classification in respect of a moderate correlation as compared with Aybar’s classification. Conclusions. Gustilo’s classification may have a certain level of ambiguity because their types are not exclusive and objective enough. Aybar’s classification shaved good level of diagnostic concordance and a good level of learning , wich may suggest that it is more objective and easier to use.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License