Filiz Tuna1, Selçuk Yavuz2, Derya Demirbağ Demirbağ Kabayel2, Ali Sarıkaya3. 1. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Trakya University Faculty of Health Sciences, Edirne, Turkey. 2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical Faculty of Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty of Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess poor positioning rates of patients during X-ray and the accuracy of the analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, we reanalyzed 323 dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) reports, by evaluating the scan images for proper patient positioning and scan analysis. We reviewed reports, according to a checklist prepared considering the proposals of Watts and The International Society for Clinical Densitometry official positions for 2013 (which were the same as in 2015). At least two remaining vertebrae were used to derive new bone mineral density and new T-scores. RESULTS: Positioning failures were found in 64.7% of the spine X-rays, 60.5% of the hip X-rays, and 83.9% of X-rays of both regions. A total of 112 (34.7%) spinal DXA images needed new T-score adjustments. T-scores and bone mineral density differed between the first reports and the clinician reanalysis (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The error rate in DXA reports was higher than expected. Clinician analysis of DXA reports are important. To obtain a quality DXA report, all healthcare professionals should be trained and reminded about this topic.
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess poor positioning rates of patients during X-ray and the accuracy of the analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, we reanalyzed 323 dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) reports, by evaluating the scan images for proper patient positioning and scan analysis. We reviewed reports, according to a checklist prepared considering the proposals of Watts and The International Society for Clinical Densitometry official positions for 2013 (which were the same as in 2015). At least two remaining vertebrae were used to derive new bone mineral density and new T-scores. RESULTS: Positioning failures were found in 64.7% of the spine X-rays, 60.5% of the hip X-rays, and 83.9% of X-rays of both regions. A total of 112 (34.7%) spinal DXA images needed new T-score adjustments. T-scores and bone mineral density differed between the first reports and the clinician reanalysis (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The error rate in DXA reports was higher than expected. Clinician analysis of DXA reports are important. To obtain a quality DXA report, all healthcare professionals should be trained and reminded about this topic.
Entities:
Keywords:
Analysis; dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; errors; positioning