Aim To propose a new prognostic classification system for pelvic injuries based on a new detailed and all-encompassing evaluation of the injury pelvic outcome score and to check the prognostic value of this classification and evaluate its reliability and reproducibility. Methods From January 2017 to June 2020 from 156 pelvic fractures treated at our hospitals, 98 patients with pelvic fractures were recruited according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. All patients compiled three scores (New Score System, Majeed Score, SF-12) sessions two times during the hospital stay to evaluate the endpoint before the trauma and two years after the trauma. All patients carried out three tests independently. The evaluation of three scores included a pelvic and general complication after the surgery, the times needed to compile three score system. For reliability of the new score systems we evaluated the inter-observer or intraobserver agreement, the prediction strength of each score, and a prognostic value. Results A total of 98 patients were enrolled (74 were males and 24 females) with mean age of 43.6 (±18.6) (range 16-75) years. Tau B Kendall value was 0.827 for the new score system, 0.673 for the Majeed score, 0.746 for SF-12, there was p<0.05 for the new score system. Conclusion The new score system is prognostic, reliable, reproducible and can become a useful instrument to adequately correlate the long-term outcomes of pelvic injury fractures. Also, it provides a better evaluation of pain, work, sexual possibilities and satisfaction, balance-sitting-walking and psychological status.
Falzarano G, Medici A, Carta S, Grubor P, Fortina M, Meccariello L, et al. The orthopedic damage control in pelvic ring fractures: when and why-a multicenter experience of 10 years’ treatment. J of Acute Disease. 2014. p. 201–6.
2.
Falzarano G, Rollo G, Bisaccia M, Pace V, Lanzetti R, Garcia-Prieto E, et al. Percutaneous screws CT guided to fix sacroiliac joint in tile C pelvic injury. Outcomes at 5 years of follow-up. SICOT J. 2018. p. 52.
3.
Gokalp M, Hekimoglu Y, Gozen A, Guner S, Asirdizer M. Evaluation of severity score in patients with lower limb and pelvic fractures injured in motor vehicle front-impact. Collisions Med Sci Monit. 2016. p. 4692–8.
4.
Gerbershagen H, Dagtekin O, Isenberg J, Martens N, Ozgür E, Krep H, et al. Petzke F Chronic pain and disability after pelvic and acetabular fractures--assessment with the Mainz Pain Staging System. J Trauma. 2010. p. 128–36.
5.
Majeed S. Grading the outcome of pelvic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1989. p. 304–6.
6.
Gänsslen A, Lindahl J. Evaluation Tools and Outcomes After Osteosynthesis of Unstable Type B and C Pelvic Ring Injuries. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2013. p. 305–20.
7.
Furey A, Toole O, Nascone R, Sciadini J, Copeland M, Turen C, et al. Classification of pelvic fractures: analysis of inter-and intra-observer variability using the Young-Burgess and Tile classification systems. Orthopedics. 2009. p. 401.
8.
Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960. p. 37–46.
9.
Fleiss J. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull. 1971. p. 378–82.
10.
Shoukri M, Colak D, Kaya N, Donner A. Comparison of two dependent within subject coefficients of variation to evaluate the reproducibility of measurement devices. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008. p. 24.
11.
Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977. p. 159–74.
12.
Shang K, Ke C, Fu Y, Han S, Wang P, Zhang B, et al. Feasibility of anterior pelvic ring fixation alone for treating lateral compression type 1 pelvic fractures with nondisplaced complete sacral fractures: a retrospective study. PeerJ. 2020. p. 8743.
13.
Müller F, Stosiek W, Zellner M, Neugebauer R, Füchtmeier B. The anterior subcutaneous internal fixator (ASIF) for unstable pelvic ring fractures: clinical and radiological mid-term results. Int Orthop. 2013. p. 2239–45.
14.
Huo T, Guo Y, Shenkman E, Muller K. Assessing the reliability of the short form 12 (SF-12) health Survey in adults with mental health conditions: a report from the wellness incentive and navigation (WIN) Study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018. p. 34.
15.
Duramaz A, Ilter M, Yıldız Ş, Edipoğlu E, İpek C, Bilgili M. The relationship between injury mechanism and sexual dysfunction in surgically treated pelvic fractures. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020. p. 807–16.
16.
Leserman J, Zolnoun D, Meltzer-Brody S, Lamvu G, Steege J. Identification of diagnostic subtypes of chronic pelvic pain and how subtypes differ in health status and trauma history. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006. p. 554–60.
17.
Steingrímsdóttir O, Landmark T, Macfarlane G, Nielsen C. Defining chronic pain in epidemiological studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain. 2017. p. 2092–107.
18.
Mcminn K, Thomas E, Martin K, Khetan J, Mcshan E, Bennett M, et al. Psychological morbidity and functional impairment following traumatic pelvic injury. Injury. 2020. p. 978–83.
19.
Williams L, Berk M, Henry M, Stuart A, Brennan S, Jacka F, et al. Depression following fracture in women: a study of age-matched cohorts. BMJ Open. 2014. p. 4226.
20.
Ralahy F, M, Randriantsoa P, Rakototiana M, Razafimahandry A, H. Incidence of erectile dysfunction in pelvic ring injuries: Study of 48 patients at the Antananarivo hospital, Madagascar. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019. p. 885–8.
21.
Laurent S, Simons A. Sexual dysfunction in depression and anxiety: conceptualizing sexual dysfunction as part of an internalizing dimension. Clin Psychol Rev. 2009. p. 573–85.
22.
Copuroglu C, Yilmaz B, Yilmaz S, Ozcan M, Ciftdemir M, Copuroglu E. Sexual dysfunction of male, after pelvic fracture. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2017. p. 59–63.
23.
Elnazer H, Baldwin D. Structured review of the use of the Arizona sexual experiences scale in clinical settings. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2020. p. 2730.
24.
Cannada L, Barr J. Pelvic fractures in women of childbearing age. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010. p. 1781–9.
25.
Rickman M, Link B, Solomon L. Patient weightbearing after pelvic fracture surgery-A systematic review of the literature: what is the modern evidence base? Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2019. p. 45–52.
26.
Kuile T, Weijenborg M, Spinhoven P, P. Sexual functioning in women with chronic pelvic pain: the role of anxiety and depression. J Sex Med. 2010. p. 1901–10.
27.
Muscatelli S, Spurr H, Oʼhara N, Oʼhara L, Sprague S, Slobogean G. Prevalence of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder after acute orthopaedic trauma: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Orthop Trauma. 2017. p. 47–55.
28.
Goussous N, Sawyer M, Wuersmer L, Huebner M, Osborn M, Zielinski M. Comparison of sexual function and quality of life after pelvic trauma with and without angioembolization. Burns Trauma. 2015. p. 21.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
,
