Jong Beom Lee1, Il Sup Kim2, Jung Jae Lee3, Jong-Hyeok Park1, Chul Bum Cho1, Seung Ho Yang1, Jae Hoon Sung1, Jae Taek Hong1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, St. Vincent`s Hospital, Catholic University of Korea, Suwon, South Korea. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, St. Vincent`s Hospital, Catholic University of Korea, Suwon, South Korea. Electronic address: nsman72@hanmail.net. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Gangneung Asan Hospital, Asan Medical Center, Gangneung, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study was aimed to compare the validity, reproducibility, precision, and efficiency of a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and a smartphone application, which is an educative app to easily measure sagittal balance parameters (SagittalMeter Pro), for measuring spinopelvic sagittal parameters. METHODS: Three spine surgeons measured lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic tilt (PT) on standing posteroanterior radiographs of 30 patients using PACS and SagittalMeter Pro. Measurements were repeated a week after the original measurements. Intraobserver and interobserver variabilities and reliabilities of each parameter (LL, PI, SS, and PT) were calculated for both techniques. Comparisons were performed using the paired t-test. Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and P values of < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: PACS to SagittalMeter Pro differences between the mean absolute values of LL, PI, SS, PT were 0.50°, 0.82°, 0.81°, 0.34°, respectively, and intraobserver and interobserver variabilities were similar. Excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliabilities were obtained for PACS and SagittalMeter Pro as demonstrated by values >0.86 and >0.84, respectively. Measurement times for PACS and SagittalMeter Pro were 36.63 ± 7.55 and 14.57 ± 1.96 seconds, respectively, and this difference was significant (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows PACS and SagittalMeter Pro are equivalent in terms of their abilities to measure spinopelvic sagittal parameters, and that the time required to obtain measurements was significantly less for SagittalMeter Pro. We believe that SagittalMeter Pro may be helpful when planning spinal surgery.
OBJECTIVE: The study was aimed to compare the validity, reproducibility, precision, and efficiency of a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and a smartphone application, which is an educative app to easily measure sagittal balance parameters (SagittalMeter Pro), for measuring spinopelvic sagittal parameters. METHODS: Three spine surgeons measured lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic tilt (PT) on standing posteroanterior radiographs of 30 patients using PACS and SagittalMeter Pro. Measurements were repeated a week after the original measurements. Intraobserver and interobserver variabilities and reliabilities of each parameter (LL, PI, SS, and PT) were calculated for both techniques. Comparisons were performed using the paired t-test. Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and P values of < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: PACS to SagittalMeter Pro differences between the mean absolute values of LL, PI, SS, PT were 0.50°, 0.82°, 0.81°, 0.34°, respectively, and intraobserver and interobserver variabilities were similar. Excellent intraobserver and interobserver reliabilities were obtained for PACS and SagittalMeter Pro as demonstrated by values >0.86 and >0.84, respectively. Measurement times for PACS and SagittalMeter Pro were 36.63 ± 7.55 and 14.57 ± 1.96 seconds, respectively, and this difference was significant (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows PACS and SagittalMeter Pro are equivalent in terms of their abilities to measure spinopelvic sagittal parameters, and that the time required to obtain measurements was significantly less for SagittalMeter Pro. We believe that SagittalMeter Pro may be helpful when planning spinal surgery.