Fuat Bilgili1, Çiğdem Özkara Bilgili2, Engin Çetinkaya3, Abdulkadir Polat4, İbrahim Sungur5, Yavuz Saglam6, Kamber Kasali7, Atilla Sancar Parmaksızoğlu4. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey fuatbilgili@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Baltalimanı Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 4. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Taksim Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 5. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 6. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Bahcelievler State Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 7. Department of Biostatistics, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the interobserver, intraobserver, and intermethod reliability of computer-assisted digital and manual measurements of hip sonograms. METHODS: Seventy-four hip sonograms were evaluated in this retrospective study. Five evaluators measured digital images and manual paper printouts according to the Graf method (Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1984; 102:248-255). Interobserver and intraobserver reliability rates were calculated. Reliability criteria were graded on a numeric scale. RESULTS: The interobserver reliability of both computer-based and manual methods for alpha angle measurements was good to excellent, but the interobserver reliability was fair to poor for beta angle measurements. Intraobserver reliability was varied. Alpha angle measurements by both manual and computer-based methods had high concordance with each other, whereas beta angle measurements had low concordance. The intermethod variability did not differ between observers. CONCLUSIONS: The alpha angle measurements had high concordance with each other for both manual and computer-based methods, whereas the beta angle measurements had low concordance. This information should be taken into account in clinical practice. Overall, the two measurement methods were reliable and consistent with each other.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the interobserver, intraobserver, and intermethod reliability of computer-assisted digital and manual measurements of hip sonograms. METHODS: Seventy-four hip sonograms were evaluated in this retrospective study. Five evaluators measured digital images and manual paper printouts according to the Graf method (Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1984; 102:248-255). Interobserver and intraobserver reliability rates were calculated. Reliability criteria were graded on a numeric scale. RESULTS: The interobserver reliability of both computer-based and manual methods for alpha angle measurements was good to excellent, but the interobserver reliability was fair to poor for beta angle measurements. Intraobserver reliability was varied. Alpha angle measurements by both manual and computer-based methods had high concordance with each other, whereas beta angle measurements had low concordance. The intermethod variability did not differ between observers. CONCLUSIONS: The alpha angle measurements had high concordance with each other for both manual and computer-based methods, whereas the beta angle measurements had low concordance. This information should be taken into account in clinical practice. Overall, the two measurement methods were reliable and consistent with each other.