Suppr超能文献

膝关节骨关节炎患者关节间隙宽度的评估:4种测量工具的比较

Assessment of joint space width in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a comparison of 4 measuring instruments.

作者信息

Ravaud P, Chastang C, Auleley G R, Giraudeau B, Royant V, Amor B, Genant H K, Dougados M

机构信息

Clinique de Rhumatologie, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France.

出版信息

J Rheumatol. 1996 Oct;23(10):1749-55.

PMID:8895153
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the intra and interobserver reproducibility of 4 measuring instruments for assessing joint space width in knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to estimate the effects of patients, instrument, session order, and reader variation.

METHODS

We studied 30 patients with unilateral tibiofemoral OA selected to represent a broad range of radiographic changes. Joint space width (JSW) was measured on plain anteroposterior weight bearing radiographs. Using an experimental design, 3 readers assessed JSW 3 times with 4 measuring instruments (ruler, caliper, graduated magnifying glass, digitized assessment).

RESULTS

Intra and interobserver reproducibility was high with all measuring instruments (intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.95 to 0.98 and from 0.91 to 0.97, respectively). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a patient effect (p < 10(-6)), a reader effect (p = 0.0001), an instrument effect (p = 0.0001), and a session order effect (p = 0.04). The variance component estimates were patients 55%, readers 34%, session order 2%, instruments 8%. ANOVA performed separately for each instrument showed that session order differences always represented less than 1% of the total variance. The reader component accounted for 0% of the total variance for the ruler, 2% for the digitized method, 16% for the caliper, and 18% for the graduated magnifying glass.

CONCLUSION

Ruler and digitized assessment have better reliability than caliper and graduated magnifying glass.

摘要

目的

评估4种测量工具在评估膝关节骨关节炎(OA)关节间隙宽度时的观察者内和观察者间的可重复性,并估计患者、测量工具、测量顺序和阅片者差异的影响。

方法

我们研究了30例单侧胫股关节OA患者,这些患者被选来代表广泛的影像学改变。在负重前后位平片上测量关节间隙宽度(JSW)。采用实验设计,3名阅片者使用4种测量工具(直尺、卡尺、带刻度放大镜、数字化评估)对JSW进行3次测量。

结果

所有测量工具的观察者内和观察者间可重复性都很高(组内相关系数分别为0.95至0.98和0.91至0.97)。方差分析(ANOVA)显示患者效应(p < 10⁻⁶)、阅片者效应(p = 0.0001)、测量工具效应(p = 0.0001)和测量顺序效应(p = 0.04)。方差成分估计为患者55%、阅片者34%、测量顺序2%、测量工具8%。对每种测量工具分别进行的方差分析表明,测量顺序差异始终占总方差的不到1%。阅片者成分在直尺测量中占总方差的0%,在数字化方法中占2%,在卡尺测量中占16%,在带刻度放大镜测量中占18%。

结论

直尺和数字化评估比卡尺和带刻度放大镜具有更好的可靠性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验