Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct;140(4):579e-586e.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003688.

The Whitaker Classification of Craniosynostosis Outcomes: An Assessment of Interrater Reliability

Ari M Wes  1   2 , Sanjay Naran  1   2 , James Sun  1   2 , Daniel Mazzaferro  1   2 , Wen Xu  1   2 , Phuong Nguyen  1   2 , Linton A Whitaker  1   2 , Scott P Bartlett  1   2 , Jesse A Taylor  1   2
Affiliations

The Whitaker Classification of Craniosynostosis Outcomes: An Assessment of Interrater Reliability

Ari M Wes et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The Whitaker classification is a simple and widely used system for describing aesthetic outcomes after craniosynostosis surgery. The purpose of this study is to evaluate its interrater reliability for patients who have undergone fronto-orbital surgery.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients with craniosynostosis who underwent surgical intervention at a tertiary referral center was conducted. Inclusion criteria were as follows: single-suture craniosynostosis, surgical intervention before age 2 years, and photographs taken before revisions between 5 and 20 years of age. Thirteen craniofacial surgeons independently reviewed the subjects' photographs and assigned Whitaker classifications. Interrater reliability was assessed with the Cohen kappa statistic.

Results: Twenty-nine subjects were included. Average ages at surgery and at the time of postoperative photography were 0.8 year and 12.8 years, respectively. The κ value for all 13 raters was 0.1567 (p < 0.0001), indicating "slight agreement." Pairwise comparisons demonstrated κ values ranging from 0.0384 to 0.5492. The average rating for the set of 29 photographs differed significantly across the 13 raters (p = 0.0020) and ranged from 1.79 ± 0.68 to 2.79 ± 0.77. Finally, we found that average Whitaker classification did not differ significantly between subjects who subsequently underwent cranioplasty and/or fronto-orbital advancement and those who did not (subsequent procedures, 2.45 ± 0.55; no subsequent procedures, 1.88 ± 0.78; p = 0.1087).

Conclusions: The Whitaker classification exhibits low interrater reliability and does not predict future treatment. It may benefit craniofacial surgeons to create new evaluation tools with greater precision, to improve the quality of patient care and craniofacial outcomes research.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Whitaker LA, Pashayan H, Reichman J. A proposed new classification of craniofacial anomalies. Cleft Palate J. 1981;18:161176.
    1. Whitaker LA, Bartlett SP, Schut L, Bruce D. Craniosynostosis: An analysis of the timing, treatment, and complications in 164 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;80:195212.
    1. Hansen M, Padwa BL, Scott RM, Stieg PE, Mulliken JB. Synostotic frontal plagiocephaly: Anthropometric comparison of three techniques for surgical correction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;100:13871395.
    1. Delye H, Clijmans T, Mommaerts MY, Sloten JV, Goffin J. Creating a normative database of age-specific 3D geometrical data, bone density, and bone thickness of the developing skull: A pilot study. 2015;16:687702.
    1. Landis JR, Koch GG. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 1977;33:363374.