Advertisement

The Oberg, Manske, and Tonkin Classification of Congenital Upper Limb Anomalies: A Consensus Decision-Making Study for Difficult or Unclassifiable Cases

Published:September 09, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2022.07.007

      Purpose

      An ideal classification system promotes communication and guides treatment for congenital upper limb differences (CULDs). The Oberg, Manske, and Tonkin (OMT) classification utilizes phenotypic presentation and knowledge of developmental biology for the classification of CULDs. In this consensus decision-making study, we hypothesized that CULDs that are difficult to classify would be identically classified by a group of experienced pediatric hand surgeons.

      Methods

      An international consortium of 14 pediatric hand surgeons in 3 countries contributed a group of 72 difficult-to-classify CULD cases. These were identified from the clinical practices of the surgeons and from associated registries. Through a Delphi-type process, repeated efforts were made to obtain consensus for the correct OMT classification of each case utilizing clinical images and radiographs.

      Results

      The first round of discussion yielded a universal consensus for 57 cases. The remaining 15 cases continued to be put through additional rounds of the Delphi-type process. The repeat classification and discussion resulted in a final yield of 93% complete consensus in classification by the OMT. The primary challenge in diagnosis was differentiating cleft hand from ulnar longitudinal deficiency, identified as group A. Five cases were in this group, yet 2 remained without a clear consensus. Another controversial group, group B, was termed “brachy-polydactyly” and consisted of 3 cases where diagnoses varied between sympolydactyly, symbrachydactyly, or complex syndactyly.

      Conclusions

      The Delphi-type process was feasible and effective and allowed a 93% consensus in the diagnosis of difficult-to-classify cases by the OMT Classification. There remain limitations and controversies with the OMT system, especially when classifying hands with less than 5 skeletal digits, syndactyly, and those with diagnostic overlap between ulnar longitudinal deficiency and cleft hand and those considered “brachypolydactyly.” An improved understanding of the underlying etiology may be needed to determine the final diagnosis in difficult-to-classify conditions.

      Clinical Relevance statement

      A consensus-seeking approach is effective and feasible in addressing difficult-to-classify CULDs.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Hand Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Swanson A.B.
        A classification for congenital limb malformations.
        J Hand Surg Am. 1976; 1: 8-22
        • Oberg K.C.
        • Feenstra J.M.
        • Manske P.R.
        • Tonkin M.A.
        Developmental biology and classification of congenital anomalies of the hand and upper extremity.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2010; 35: 2066-2076
        • Tonkin M.A.
        • Tolerton S.K.
        • Quick T.J.
        • et al.
        Classification of congenital anomalies of the hand and upper limb: development and assessment of a new system.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2013; 38: 1845-1853
        • Goldfarb C.A.
        • Ezaki M.
        • Wall L.B.
        • Lam W.L.
        • Oberg K.C.
        The Oberg-Manske-Tonkin (OMT) Classification of congenital upper extremities: update for 2020.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2020; 45: 542-547
        • Bae D.S.
        • Canizares M.F.
        • Miller P.E.
        • et al.
        Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the Oberg-Manske-Tonkin (OMT) Classification: establishing a registry on congenital upper limb differences.
        Pediatr Orthop. 2018; 38: 69-74
        • Tang J.B.
        • Giddins G.
        Why and how to report surgeons’ level of expertise.
        J Hand Surg Eur. 2016; 41: 365-366
        • Steurer J.
        The Delphi method: an efficient procedure to generate knowledge.
        Skelet Radiol. 2011; 40: 959-961
        • Al-Qattan M.M.
        • Al-Sahabi A.
        • Al-Arfaj N.
        Ulnar ray deficiency: a review of the classification systems, the clinical features in 72 cases, and related developmental biology.
        J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2017; 35: 699-707
        • Guero S.
        • Holder-Espinasse M.
        Insights into the pathogenesis and treatment of split/hand foot malformation (cleft hand/foot).
        J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2019; 44: 80-87
        • Manske P.R.
        • Halikis M.N.
        Surgical classification of central deficiency according to the thumb web.
        J Hand Surg Am. 1995; 20: 687-697
        • Miller J.K.
        • Wenner S.M.
        • Kruger L.M.
        Ulnar deficiency.
        J Hand Surg Am. 1986; 11: 822-829
        • Ogino T.
        • Kato H.
        Clinical and experimental studies on ulnar ray deficiency.
        Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 1988; 20: 330-337
        • Cole R.J.
        • Manske P.R.
        Classification of ulnar deficiency according to the thumb and first web.
        J Hand Surg Am. 1997; 22: 479-488
        • Al-Qattan M.M.
        • Yang Y.
        • Kozin S.H.
        Embryology of the upper limb.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2009; 34: 1340-1350
        • Milholland A.V.
        • Wheeler S.G.
        • Heieck J.J.
        Medical assessment by a Delphi group opinion technic.
        N Engl J Med. 1973; 288: 1272-1275
        • Koplan J.P.
        • Farer L.S.
        Choice of preventive trestment for isoniazid-resistant tuberculous infection: use of decision analysis and the Delphi technique.
        JAMA. 1980; 244: 2736-2740
        • Graham B.
        • Regehr G.
        • Wright J.G.
        Delphi as a method to establish consensus for diagnostic criteria.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56: 1150-1156
        • Hand Surgery Quality C.
        Candidate quality measures for hand surgery.
        J Hand Surg Am. 2017; 42 (e3): 859-866
        • Johnson N.
        • Leighton P.
        • Dias J.
        The use of the Delphi method for hand surgery research.
        J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2019; 44: 547-550