Dutton K E, Jones T J, Slinger B S, Scull E R, O'Connor J
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 1989 Mar;12(1):16-23.
The reliability of the traditional Cobb angle index, which at present exhibits a wide range of reported values, was determined in this study and amounted to a within subject error of +/-4.3 degrees and a between subject error of +/-4.9 degrees. An attempt to pinpoint the source of this variability by investigating the influence of choice of end vertebrae proved inconclusive. The reliability of a computer assisted Cobb angle index, developed to improve measurement accuracy, was also examined and an estimated within subject error of +/-1.5 degrees and a between subject error of +/-1.6 degrees obtained. A comparison of the traditional and computer assisted methods indicates a high correlation between the Cobb angle derived using the two methods when measuring like curves and an improved reliability obtained by the computer method. Such an improvement is worth implementing clinically but of course the availability of a computer and digitizer and a little extra time for an operator to input the X-ray coordinates may be a barrier to its general use.
本研究测定了传统Cobb角指数的可靠性,目前该指数报告值范围广泛,其受试者内误差为±4.3度,受试者间误差为±4.9度。通过研究终椎选择的影响来确定这种变异性来源的尝试未得出明确结论。还对为提高测量准确性而开发的计算机辅助Cobb角指数的可靠性进行了检查,得到的受试者内误差估计为±1.5度,受试者间误差为±1.6度。传统方法与计算机辅助方法的比较表明,在测量相似曲线时,两种方法得出的Cobb角之间具有高度相关性,且计算机方法的可靠性有所提高。这种改进在临床上值得应用,但当然,计算机和数字化仪的可用性以及操作员输入X射线坐标所需的额外时间可能会成为其广泛应用的障碍。