Radiographic measurements of the normal distal radius: reliability of computer-aided CT versus physicians' radiograph interpretation.
cross_sectional · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 33148107.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1177/1753193420968399.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We examined the reliability of a computer-aided cone-beam CT analysis of radiographic parameters of 50 normal distal radii and compared it with interobserver agreement of measurements made by three groups of physicians on two-dimensional plain radiographs. The intra-rater reliability of the computer-aided analysis was evaluated on 33 wrists imaged twice by cone-beam CT. The longitudinal axis, anterior tilt, radial inclination and ulnar variance were measured. The reliability of computer-aided analysis was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.94-0.96) while the interobserver agreement of two-dimensional radiograph interpretation was good (ulnar variance, ICC 0.80-0.84) to poor (anterior tilt and radial inclination, ICC 0.20-0.42). We conclude that computer-aided cone-beam CT analysis was a reliable tool for radiographic parameter determination, whereas physicians demonstrated substantial variability especially in interpreting the angular parameters.
Medical subject headings
- Physicians
- Radius Fractures
Anatomy
- radius