BACKGROUND: Bone mineral density (BMD) measurements are frequently performed repeatedly for each patient. Subsequent BMD measurements allow reproducibility to be assessed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reproducibility of BMD by dual energy x ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to investigate the practical value of different measures of reproducibility in a group of postmenopausal women. METHODS: Ninety five women, mean age 59.9 years, underwent two subsequent BMD measurements of spine and hip. Reproducibility was expressed as smallest detectable difference (SDD), coefficient of variation (CV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Sources of variation were investigated by multilevel analysis. RESULTS: The median interval between measurements was 0 days (range 0-45). The mean difference (SD) between the measurements (g/cm(2)) was -0.001 (0.02) and -0.0004 (0.02) at L1-4 and the total hip, respectively. At L1-4 and the total hip, SDD (g/cm(2)) was +/-0.05 and +/-0.04 and CV (%) was 1.92 and 1.59, respectively. The ICC at spine and hip was 0.99. CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility in the postmenopausal women studied was good. In a repeated DXA scan a BMD change exceeding 2 radical 2CV (%), the least significant change (LSC), or the SDD should be regarded as significant. Use of the SDD is preferable to use of the CV and LSC (%) because of its independence from BMD and its expression in absolute units. Expressed as SDD, a BMD change of at least +/-0.05 g/cm(2) at L1-4 and +/-0.04 g/cm(2) at the total hip should be considered significant.
BACKGROUND: Bone mineral density (BMD) measurements are frequently performed repeatedly for each patient. Subsequent BMD measurements allow reproducibility to be assessed. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reproducibility of BMD by dual energy x ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to investigate the practical value of different measures of reproducibility in a group of postmenopausal women. METHODS: Ninety five women, mean age 59.9 years, underwent two subsequent BMD measurements of spine and hip. Reproducibility was expressed as smallest detectable difference (SDD), coefficient of variation (CV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Sources of variation were investigated by multilevel analysis. RESULTS: The median interval between measurements was 0 days (range 0-45). The mean difference (SD) between the measurements (g/cm(2)) was -0.001 (0.02) and -0.0004 (0.02) at L1-4 and the total hip, respectively. At L1-4 and the total hip, SDD (g/cm(2)) was +/-0.05 and +/-0.04 and CV (%) was 1.92 and 1.59, respectively. The ICC at spine and hip was 0.99. CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility in the postmenopausal women studied was good. In a repeated DXA scan a BMD change exceeding 2 radical 2CV (%), the least significant change (LSC), or the SDD should be regarded as significant. Use of the SDD is preferable to use of the CV and LSC (%) because of its independence from BMD and its expression in absolute units. Expressed as SDD, a BMD change of at least +/-0.05 g/cm(2) at L1-4 and +/-0.04 g/cm(2) at the total hip should be considered significant.
Authors: H K Genant; C Cooper; G Poor; I Reid; G Ehrlich; J Kanis; B E Nordin; E Barrett-Connor; D Black; J P Bonjour; B Dawson-Hughes; P D Delmas; J Dequeker; S Ragi Eis; C Gennari; O Johnell; C C Johnston; E M Lau; U A Liberman; R Lindsay; T J Martin; B Masri; C A Mautalen; P J Meunier; N Khaltaev Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 1999 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: S J Neele; W Marchien van Baal; M J van der Mooren; H Kessel; J C Netelenbos; P Kenemans Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: S C Van Coeverden; C M De Ridder; J C Roos; M A Van't Hof; J C Netelenbos; H A Delemarre-Van de Waal Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: S Cohen; R M Levy; M Keller; E Boling; R D Emkey; M Greenwald; T M Zizic; S Wallach; K L Sewell; B P Lukert; D W Axelrod; A A Chines Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 1999-11
Authors: David G Reynolds; Saad Shaikh; Mark Owen Papuga; Amy L Lerner; Regis J O'Keefe; Edward M Schwarz; Hani A Awad Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Hollmann D Aya; Andrew Rhodes; Nick Fletcher; R Michael Grounds; Maurizio Cecconi Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2015-03-07 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Glenn Haugeberg; Michael J Green; Philip G Conaghan; Mark Quinn; Richard Wakefield; Susanna M Proudman; Sheena Stewart; Elizabeth Hensor; Paul Emery Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2007-05-09 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Ruud H Knols; Geert Aufdemkampe; Eling D de Bruin; Daniel Uebelhart; Neil K Aaronson Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 2.362