Interobserver reliability of the Tile classification system for pelvic fractures among radiologists and surgeons

To assess the interobserver reliability (IOR) of the Tile classification system, and its potential influence on outcomes, for the interpretation of CT images of pelvic fractures by radiologists and surgeons. Retrospective data (1/2008–12/2016) from 238 patients with pelvic fractures were analyzed. Mean patient age was 44 years (SD 20); 66% were male. There were 54 Tile A, 82 Tile B, and 102 Tile C type injuries. The 30-day mortality rate was 15% (36/238). Six observers, three radiologists, and three surgeons with different levels of experience (attending/resident/intern) classified each fracture into one of the 26 second-order subcategories of the Tile classification. Weighted kappa coefficients were used to assess the IORs for the three main categories and nine first-order subcategories. The overall IORs of the Tile system for the main categories and first-order subcategories were moderate (kappa = 0.44) and fair (kappa = 0.31), respectively. IOR was fair to moderate among radiologists, but only fair among surgeons. By level of training, IOR was moderate between attendings and between residents, whereas it was only fair between interns. IOR was moderate to substantial (kappa = 0.56–0.70) between the radiology attending and resident. Association of the Tile fracture type with 30-day mortality was present based on two out of six observer ratings. The overall IOR of the Tile classification system is only fair to moderate, increases with the level of rater experience and is better among radiologists than surgeons. In the light of these findings, results from studies using this classification system must be interpreted cautiously.