Literature DB >> 7824978

Variation in Cobb angle measurements in scoliosis.

J E Pruijs1, M A Hageman, W Keessen, R van der Meer, J C van Wieringen.   

Abstract

In order to determine the reliability of the Cobb angle measurement as it is used in the clinical management of scoliosis, a methodological survey was carried out. In the measurement of a Cobb angle two phases can be distinguished: (a) the production of a spinal radiograph and (b) the measurement of the angle itself. In respect of the first phase, the variation in production of the radiographs was calculated on Cobb angle measurements made by one investigator on serial radiographs of patients who underwent spinal fusion for scoliosis and therefore had a fixed spinal curvature. For the second phase, the accuracy of Cobb angle measurement was investigated by comparing measurements on the same radiographs of 46 scoliosis patients obtained by three investigators, namely two orthopaedic surgeons and an orthopaedic fellow who was assigned to a school screening project. Results were expressed as a Spearman correlation coefficient and a standard deviation of the differences. The Spearman correlation coefficient was 0.98 for the repeated radiographs (production variation) and also 0.98 for the repeated measurements on one radiograph (interobserver measurement variation). The standard deviation of the differences in Cobb angle for the repeated radiographs amounted to 3.2 degrees and for the repeated measurements on one radiograph it was 2.0 degrees. Although there is a good reproducibility of the Cobb angle measurement between different investigators, the variation in production of a spinal radiograph is an important source of error. This should be taken into account when making decisions in scoliosis management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7824978     DOI: 10.1007/bf00223081

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Skeletal Radiol        ISSN: 0364-2348            Impact factor:   2.199


  8 in total

1.  School screening for scoliosis: methodologic considerations. Part 1: External measurements.

Authors:  J E Pruijs; W Keessen; R van der Meer; J C van Wieringen; M A Hageman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs. Intraobserver and interobserver variation.

Authors:  D L Carman; R H Browne; J G Birch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of intrinsic error.

Authors:  R T Morrissy; G S Goldsmith; E C Hall; D Kehl; G H Cowie
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Variability of scoliosis measurement from spinal roentgenograms.

Authors:  C E Beekman; V Hall
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1979-06

5.  Evaluation of the reliability of radiological methods for registration of scoliosis.

Authors:  J A Sevastikoglou; E Bergquist
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1969

6.  A clinical study of the differences between the scoliotic angles measured on posteroanterior and anteroposterior radiographs.

Authors:  A A DeSmet; J E Goin; M A Asher; H G Scheuch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Observer variation in assessing spinal curvature and skeletal development in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  M S Goldberg; B Poitras; N E Mayo; H Labelle; R Bourassa; R Cloutier
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  [Follow-up problems in scoliosis patients].

Authors:  G Schumpe; P Hofmann; H Rössler
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1984 May-Jun
  8 in total
  35 in total

Review 1.  Assessing the child with scoliosis: the role of surface topography.

Authors:  N J Oxborrow
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 2.  A review of methods for quantitative evaluation of spinal curvature.

Authors:  Tomaz Vrtovec; Franjo Pernus; Bostjan Likar
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  The validity and reliability of "Spinal Mouse" assessment of spinal curvatures in the frontal plane in pediatric adolescent idiopathic thoraco-lumbar curves.

Authors:  Ayse Livanelioglu; Fatma Kaya; Vugar Nabiyev; Gokhan Demirkiran; Tüzün Fırat
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  EOS suspension test for the assessment of spinal flexibility in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Caroline Hirsch; Brice Ilharreborde; Keyvan Mazda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-04       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Shear-wave elastography can evaluate annulus fibrosus alteration in adolescent scoliosis.

Authors:  Tristan Langlais; Claudio Vergari; Raphael Pietton; Jean Dubousset; Wafa Skalli; Raphael Vialle
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Computer-aided assessment of scoliosis on posteroanterior radiographs.

Authors:  Junhua Zhang; Edmond Lou; Douglas L Hill; James V Raso; Yuanyuan Wang; Lawrence H Le; Xinling Shi
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  Automatic Cobb measurement of scoliosis based on fuzzy Hough Transform with vertebral shape prior.

Authors:  Junhua Zhang; Edmond Lou; Lawrence H Le; Douglas L Hill; James V Raso; Yuanyuan Wang
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-05-31       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  Pelvic Floor Symptoms and Spinal Curvature in Women.

Authors:  Isuzu Meyer; Tatum A McArthur; Ying Tang; Jessica L McKinney; Sarah L Morgan; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.091

9.  Automatic quantification of spinal curvature in scoliotic radiograph using image processing.

Authors:  Anitha H; G K Prabhu
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.460

10.  Visualisation of the brace effect on the spinal profile in idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Alfred Schmitz; Roy König; Jörg Kandyba; Peter Pennekamp; Ottmar Schmitt; Ursula E Jaeger
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-10-05       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.