Albert Christersson1, Johan Nysjö2, Lars Berglund3, Filip Malmberg2, Ida-Maria Sintorn2, Ingela Nyström2, Sune Larsson4. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Uppsala University, S-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden. albert.christersson@akademiska.se. 2. Centre for Image Analysis, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 3. Uppsala Clinical Research Centre, UCR Statistics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 4. Department of Orthopaedics, Uppsala University, S-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the reliability and agreement between a computer tomography-based method (CT) and digitalised 2D radiographs (XR) when measuring change in dorsal angulation over time in distal radius fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiographs from 33 distal radius fractures treated with external fixation were retrospectively analysed. All fractures had been examined using both XR and CT at six times over 6 months postoperatively. The changes in dorsal angulation between the first reference images and the following examinations in every patient were calculated from 133 follow-up measurements by two assessors and repeated at two different time points. The measurements were analysed using Bland-Altman plots, comparing intra- and inter-observer agreement within and between XR and CT. RESULTS: The mean differences in intra- and inter-observer measurements for XR, CT, and between XR and CT were close to zero, implying equal validity. The average intra- and inter-observer limits of agreement for XR, CT, and between XR and CT were ± 4.4°, ± 1.9° and ± 6.8° respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For scientific purpose, the reliability of XR seems unacceptably low when measuring changes in dorsal angulation in distal radius fractures, whereas the reliability for the semi-automatic CT-based method was higher and is therefore preferable when a more precise method is requested.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the reliability and agreement between a computer tomography-based method (CT) and digitalised 2D radiographs (XR) when measuring change in dorsal angulation over time in distal radius fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiographs from 33 distal radius fractures treated with external fixation were retrospectively analysed. All fractures had been examined using both XR and CT at six times over 6 months postoperatively. The changes in dorsal angulation between the first reference images and the following examinations in every patient were calculated from 133 follow-up measurements by two assessors and repeated at two different time points. The measurements were analysed using Bland-Altman plots, comparing intra- and inter-observer agreement within and between XR and CT. RESULTS: The mean differences in intra- and inter-observer measurements for XR, CT, and between XR and CT were close to zero, implying equal validity. The average intra- and inter-observer limits of agreement for XR, CT, and between XR and CT were ± 4.4°, ± 1.9° and ± 6.8° respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For scientific purpose, the reliability of XR seems unacceptably low when measuring changes in dorsal angulation in distal radius fractures, whereas the reliability for the semi-automatic CT-based method was higher and is therefore preferable when a more precise method is requested.
Authors: Debdut Biswas; Jesse E Bible; Michael Bohan; Andrew K Simpson; Peter G Whang; Jonathan N Grauer Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Janni Jensen; Hans B Tromborg; Benjamin S B Rasmussen; Oke Gerke; Trine Torfing; Helle Precht; Ole Graumann Journal: J Hand Surg Glob Online Date: 2021-06-08