Kyphosis in fractures: evaluation of digital measuring
Objective: This study evaluates the manual and digital reliability and reproducibility of five methods of measuring deformity (kyphosis) in thoracolumbar burst fractures. Method: Ninety (90) tomographic images were evaluated and, in each case, kyphotic deformity was measured, both manually and digitally, through the five most relevant methods described in the literature. For the assessment of intraobserver error, 20 cases were measured again. Results: The results show that all five methods are highly reliable and digitally reproducible, with estimated error near or lower than that indicated in the intraobserver error analysis. Cobb's method had the highest concordance (96%) while the sagittal index had the lowest concordance (75%). It is also suggested that digital assessment is more reliable then the manual method. Conclusion: All tested methods are highly reliable and digitally reproducible.
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Digital revista |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna
2014
|
| Online Access: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-18512014000200133 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objective: This study evaluates the manual and digital reliability and reproducibility of five methods of measuring deformity (kyphosis) in thoracolumbar burst fractures. Method: Ninety (90) tomographic images were evaluated and, in each case, kyphotic deformity was measured, both manually and digitally, through the five most relevant methods described in the literature. For the assessment of intraobserver error, 20 cases were measured again. Results: The results show that all five methods are highly reliable and digitally reproducible, with estimated error near or lower than that indicated in the intraobserver error analysis. Cobb's method had the highest concordance (96%) while the sagittal index had the lowest concordance (75%). It is also suggested that digital assessment is more reliable then the manual method. Conclusion: All tested methods are highly reliable and digitally reproducible. |
|---|