Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026
Measurement of Dynamic Scapular Kinematics Using an Acromion Marker Cluster to Minimize Skin Movement Artifact
Published on: February 10, 2015
Intra- and interdisciplinary agreement in the rating of acromioclavicular joint dislocations
Matthew Pifer1, Kashif Ashfaq, Tristan Maerz
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, MI.
Background:
Acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation is a common injury observed and treated by physicians from several disciplines; proper classification and communication of the diagnosis between physicians is essential to manage injuries properly. This study assessed inter- and intradepartmental agreement in the rating of AC joint dislocations and compared departments of orthopedic surgery, musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology, and emergency medicine (EM).
Methods:
Fifty radiographs indicating a random distribution of AC dislocations (Rockwood types I, II, III, and V) were sent to 25 resident, fellow, and attending physicians; the study group consisted of orthopedic surgeons (n = 9), MSK radiologists (n = 7), and EM physicians (n = 9). Dislocations were rated by physicians using the Rockwood classification (excluding type IV) and rating agreement was derived using the multirater κ statistic.
Results:
Moderate rating agreement was found among orthopedic surgeons (κ = 0.5147), which was higher than among radiologists (κ = 0.3628) or EM physicians (κ = 0.1894). Interdisciplinary rating agreement was highest between orthopedic surgeons and MSK radiologists and lowest between MSK radiologists and EM physicians. Attending orthopedic surgeons showed the highest rating agreement (κ = 0.5167) compared with attending MSK radiologists (κ = 0.3585) and attending EM physicians (κ = 0.2612). In-training orthopedic surgeons had higher rating agreement (κ = 0.4918) than in-training MSK radiologists (κ = 0.4218) and in-training EM physicians (κ = 0.1410).
Discussion:
Orthopedic surgeons exhibited the highest intradepartmental rating agreement in assessing AC joint injuries, but interdepartmental rating agreement was low. It is unclear if low interdepartmental rating agreement reflects classification or training weaknesses; recognition of these differences may help develop a more standardized education for physicians to improve the management of AC joint injuries.
Conclusions:
Interdisciplinary rating agreement of AC joint injuries is low. Further study may help improve education and communication about AC joint injuries among physicians.
