Literature DB >> 19165510

Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of powers ratio for assessment of atlanto-occipital junction: comparison of plain radiography and computed tomography.

Gang Li1, Peter Passias, Michal Kozanek, Brian D Shannon, Guoan Li, Fernando Villamil, Christopher M Bono, Mitchel Harris, Kirkham B Wood.   

Abstract

Powers ratio, as assessed on plain radiographs or computed tomography (CT) images, appears to have clinical and prognostic value. To date, the validation of this assessment tool has been limited to a small number of observers at a single site. No study has examined the intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of the Powers ratio measurement on plain radiographs or CT images among a large cohort of spine surgeons. This type of validation is critical to allow for the broader use of the Powers ratio methodology in research studies and clinical applications. Plain radiographs and spiral CT images of the cervical spine of 32 patients were assessed, and the Powers ratio was determined by five spine surgeons. Each surgeon performed three readings, 7 months apart. In the first round of measurements, the observers used only the Powers' method of instruction. The second and third measurement sets were obtained after an interactive teaching session on the methodology. The order of the images was altered for the second and third set of measurements. The coefficient of variation (Cv) was calculated to determine the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reliability for each imaging technique. A Bland-Altman plot was then used to assess the agreement between the two imaging techniques. For interobserver reliability, the mean Cv of the Powers ratio was 9.09 and 4.31% for plain radiographs and CT, respectively. The Cv mean value for intraobserver reproducibility averaged 4.95% (range 1.39-9.08) when CT scans were used and 14.17% (range 7.54-34.30) when plain radiographs were used. For intraobserver reproducibility, the lowest and highest Cv mean value of five raters was 1.39 and 9.08% using CT scans and 7.54 and 34.3% using plain radiographs. The Bland-Altman plot, demonstrated that the two methods were in close agreement on the -0.8 and 0.89% interval for limits of agreement (bias +/- 1.96sigma). The intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of Powers ratio measurement was acceptable (<5%) with CT scans but not with plain radiographs. However, despite the statistically inferior reliability and repeatability, the Bland-Altman plot analysis showed that given the -0.8 and 0.89% limits of agreement, the two methods may be used interchangeably in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19165510      PMCID: PMC2899465          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0877-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  10 in total

1.  Intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability of cervical spine measurements.

Authors:  C C Wellborn; P F Sturm; R S Hatch; S R Bomze; K Jablonski
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.324

2.  Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of maximum canal compromise and spinal cord compression for evaluation of acute traumatic cervical spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Michael G Fehlings; Julio C Furlan; Eric M Massicotte; Paul Arnold; Bizhan Aarabi; James Harrop; D Greg Anderson; Christopher M Bono; Marcel Dvorak; Charles Fisher; John France; Rune Hedlund; Ignacio Madrazo; Russ Nockels; Raja Rampersaud; Glenn Rechtine; Alexander R Vaccaro
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Reproducibility in the measurement of atlanto-occipital instability in children with Down syndrome.

Authors:  L A Karol; E G Sheffield; K Crawford; M K Moody; R H Browne
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Diagnosis of atlanto-occipital dislocation.

Authors:  B B Kuzma; J M Goodman
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  1997-10

5.  Traumatic occipitoatlantal dislocation.

Authors:  S Saeheng; N Phuenpathom
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  2001-01

6.  Traumatic anterior atlanto-occipital dislocation.

Authors:  B Powers; M D Miller; R S Kramer; S Martinez; J A Gehweiler
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 4.654

7.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  A blinded assessment of radiographic criteria for atlanto-occipital dislocation.

Authors:  Kristine Dziurzynski; Paul A Anderson; Darren B Bean; James Choi; Glen E Leverson; Rigoberto L Marin; Daniel K Resnick
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Traumatic atlanto-occipital dislocation with atlantoaxial subluxation.

Authors:  Satoshi Hamai; Katsumi Harimaya; Takeshi Maeda; Akira Hosokawa; Jun-ichi Shida; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  [Traumatic atlanto-occipital dislocation in conventional x-ray diagnosis].

Authors:  J Gaa; H K Deininger
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 0.635

  10 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Imaging of pediatric cervical spine trauma.

Authors:  Mindy X Wang; Nicholas M Beckmann
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2020-06-30

2.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Cervical Spine Under-Represents Sagittal Plane Deformity in Degenerative Myelopathy Patients.

Authors:  Douglas S Weinberg; Arunit J Chugh; Jeremy J Gebhart; Jason D Eubanks
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-09-07

3.  Identification of clinical and radiographic predictors of central nervous system injury in genetic skeletal disorders.

Authors:  Antônio L Cunha; Ana P S Champs; Carla M Mello; Mônica M M Navarro; Frederico J C Godinho; Cássia M B Carvalho; Teresa C A Ferrari
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.