Literature DB >> 9666931

An evaluation of the reproducibility and responsiveness of four 'state-of-the-art' ultrasonic heel bone measurement systems using phantoms.

R Strelitzki1, J G Truscott.   

Abstract

This paper evaluates four modern ultrasonic heel bone scanners: the Osteometer DTU-one, Hologic Sahara, CUBA Clinical and Lunar Achilles+. Six phantoms, ranging in porosity from 50% to 83%, were used to evaluate the range of values of broadband ultrasonic attenuation (BUA), speed of sound (SOS) and Stiffness/quantitative ultrasound index (where available) from each machine. Differences in inter-system variability between the lowest and highest porosity phantoms up to a factor of 3.8 were demonstrated. The reproducibility of each system was measured using a single phantom and gave values of 0.03-0.15% for SOS, 0.39-1.6% for BUA and 0.73-1.11% for Stiffness. This contrasted with values of range normalized standard deviation (CX) of 0.2-1.19% for SOS, 0.71-1.86% for BUA and 0.83-1.12% for Stiffness when the output range of the measurement is taken into account. Measures of all quantities differed between machines and care should be taken when expressing and comparing results from different systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9666931     DOI: 10.1007/BF02672504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   5.071


  15 in total

1.  Bone ultrasonic attenuation in women: reproducibility, normal variation and comparison with photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  J G Truscott; M Simpson; S P Stewart; R Milner; C F Westmacott; B Oldroyd; J A Evans; A Horsman; C M Langston; M A Smith
Journal:  Clin Phys Physiol Meas       Date:  1992-02

2.  A phantom for quantitative ultrasound of trabecular bone.

Authors:  A J Clarke; J A Evans; J G Truscott; R Milner; M A Smith
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Ultrasonic measurement: an evaluation of three heel bone scanners compared with a bench-top system.

Authors:  R Strelitzki; A J Clarke; J G Truscott; J A Evans
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Comparison of speed of sound and ultrasound attenuation in the os calcis to bone density of the radius, femur and lumbar spine.

Authors:  P Rossman; J Zagzebski; C Mesina; J Sorenson; R Mazess
Journal:  Clin Phys Physiol Meas       Date:  1989-11

5.  Broadband ultrasonic attenuation imaging: a new imaging technique of the os calcis.

Authors:  P Laugier; P Giat; G Berger
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  The measurement of broadband ultrasonic attenuation in cancellous bone.

Authors:  C M Langton; S B Palmer; R W Porter
Journal:  Eng Med       Date:  1984-04

7.  Acoustical properties of the human skull.

Authors:  F J Fry; J E Barger
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-05       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Ultrasonographic heel measurements to predict hip fracture in elderly women: the EPIDOS prospective study.

Authors:  D Hans; P Dargent-Molina; A M Schott; J L Sebert; C Cormier; P O Kotzki; P D Delmas; J M Pouilles; G Breart; P J Meunier
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-08-24       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Ultrasound discriminates patients with hip fracture equally well as dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and independently of bone mineral density.

Authors:  A M Schott; S Weill-Engerer; D Hans; F Duboeuf; P D Delmas; P J Meunier
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Universal standardization for dual x-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results.

Authors:  H K Genant; S Grampp; C C Glüer; K G Faulkner; M Jergas; K Engelke; S Hagiwara; C Van Kuijk
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  2 in total

1.  Calcaneus ultrasound in males: normative data in the Croatian population (ECUM study).

Authors:  D Kastelan; M Kujundzic-Tiljak; I Kraljevic; I Kardum; Z Giljevic; M Korsic
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.256

2.  A European multicenter comparison of quantitative ultrasound measurement variables: the OPUS study.

Authors:  M A Paggiosi; R Barkmann; C C Glüer; C Roux; D M Reid; D Felsenberg; M Bradburn; R Eastell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 4.507

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.