Tran T H, Wing D, Davis A, Bergstrom J, Schousboe J T, Nichols J F, Kado D M
Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California at San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive #0725, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0725, USA.
Division of Health Policy and Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Osteoporos Int. 2016 Mar;27(3):1255-1259. doi: 10.1007/s00198-015-3368-7. Epub 2015 Oct 16.
There are many ways to measure thoracic kyphosis ranging from simple clinical to more complex assessments. We evaluated the correlation among four commonly used kyphosis measures: Cobb angle, Debrunner kyphometer, kyphotic index, and the blocks method. Each measure was correlated with the others, confirming high clinical and research applicability.
The purpose of this study was to assess the associations among four commonly used measures of thoracic kyphosis in older adults.
Seventy two men and women aged 65-96 were recruited from the San Diego community. Four kyphosis measures were assessed in the same person during a baseline clinic visit. Two measures were done in the lying (L) and two in the standing (ST) position: (1) Cobb angle calculated from dual X-Ray absorptiometry (DXA) images (L), (2) Debrunner kyphometer (DK) angle measured by a protractor (ST), (3) kyphotic index (KI) calculated using an architect's flexicurve ruler (ST), and (4) the blocks method involving counting the number of 1.7 cm-thick blocks required to achieve a neutral head position while lying flat on the DXA table (L). Spearman rank correlation coefficients were used to determine the strength of the association between each kyphosis measure.
Using the Cobb angle as the gold standard, the blocks method demonstrated the lowest correlation (r(s) = 0.63, p < 0.0001), the Debrunner method had a moderate correlation (r(s) = 0.65, p < 0.0001), and the kyphotic index had the highest correlation (r(s) = 0.68, p < 0.0001). The correlation was strongest between the kyphotic index and the Debrunner kyphometer (r(s) = 0.76, p < 0.0001).
In older men and women, all four measures of thoracic kyphosis were significantly correlated with each other, whether assessed in the lying or standing position. Thus, any of these measures demonstrate both potential clinical and research utility.
测量胸椎后凸的方法有很多,从简单的临床评估到更复杂的评估。我们评估了四种常用的后凸测量方法之间的相关性:Cobb角、德布勒纳后凸计、后凸指数和积木法。每种测量方法都与其他方法相关,证实了其在临床和研究中的高度适用性。
本研究的目的是评估老年人中四种常用的胸椎后凸测量方法之间的关联。
从圣地亚哥社区招募了72名年龄在65 - 96岁之间的男性和女性。在基线门诊就诊期间,对同一人进行了四种后凸测量。两种测量在卧位(L)进行,两种在站立位(ST)进行:(1)从双能X线吸收法(DXA)图像计算得出的Cobb角(L),(2)用角度器测量的德布勒纳后凸计(DK)角度(ST),(3)使用建筑师的柔性曲线尺计算得出的后凸指数(KI)(ST),以及(4)积木法,即在DXA检查台上平躺时,计算达到头部中立位置所需的1.7厘米厚的积木数量(L)。使用Spearman等级相关系数来确定每种后凸测量方法之间关联的强度。
以Cobb角作为金标准,积木法显示出最低的相关性(r(s) = 0.63,p < 0.0001),德布勒纳方法有中等相关性(r(s) = 0.65,p < 0.0001),而后凸指数具有最高的相关性(r(s) = 0.68,p < 0.0001)。后凸指数与德布勒纳后凸计之间的相关性最强(r(s) = 0.76,p < 0.0001)。
在老年男性和女性中,无论在卧位还是站立位进行评估,所有四种胸椎后凸测量方法之间都存在显著相关性。因此,这些测量方法中的任何一种都具有潜在的临床和研究用途。