BACKGROUND: The authors devised a new method, the hyomental distance ratio (HMDR), for preoperatively identifying patients with a reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity, which was defined as the ratio of the hyomental distance in head extension position to that in the neutral position. They compared the accuracy of the HMDR with that of the Bellhouse test in 40 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Each patient wearing goggles on which a goniometer was mounted sat upright with the head in the neutral position and then extended the head maximally. The angle of the goggles and the hyomental distance were measured in the two head positions, and a lateral cervical radiograph was taken simultaneously. The Bellhouse angle was defined as a difference in the angles of the goggles between these positions. RESULTS: Median values of the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle and the Bellhouse angle were 11.2 degrees and 24.9 degrees , respectively. In 21 of 40 patients, the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle was less than 12 degrees (reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity). In these patients, extension of the median angle of 16.4 degrees occurred at the subaxial regions and was greater than that of 8.5 degrees in patients with a radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle of 12 degrees or more (P < 0.01). As a result, a strong relation between the Bellhouse angle and radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle was not established (P < 0.01, r = 0.48). In contrast, the HMDR correlated well with the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle (P < 0.0001, r = 0.88). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the Bellhouse test and the HMDR were 0.72 and 0.95, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HMDR was a good predictor of a reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, but the Bellhouse test was not a clinically reliable method.
BACKGROUND: The authors devised a new method, the hyomental distance ratio (HMDR), for preoperatively identifying patients with a reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity, which was defined as the ratio of the hyomental distance in head extension position to that in the neutral position. They compared the accuracy of the HMDR with that of the Bellhouse test in 40 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Each patient wearing goggles on which a goniometer was mounted sat upright with the head in the neutral position and then extended the head maximally. The angle of the goggles and the hyomental distance were measured in the two head positions, and a lateral cervical radiograph was taken simultaneously. The Bellhouse angle was defined as a difference in the angles of the goggles between these positions. RESULTS: Median values of the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle and the Bellhouse angle were 11.2 degrees and 24.9 degrees , respectively. In 21 of 40 patients, the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle was less than 12 degrees (reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity). In these patients, extension of the median angle of 16.4 degrees occurred at the subaxial regions and was greater than that of 8.5 degrees in patients with a radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle of 12 degrees or more (P < 0.01). As a result, a strong relation between the Bellhouse angle and radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle was not established (P < 0.01, r = 0.48). In contrast, the HMDR correlated well with the radiologic occipitoatlantoaxial extension angle (P < 0.0001, r = 0.88). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the Bellhouse test and the HMDR were 0.72 and 0.95, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HMDR was a good predictor of a reduced occipitoatlantoaxial extension capacity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, but the Bellhouse test was not a clinically reliable method.