...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research >Comparison of PACS and hard-copy 51-inch radiographs for measuring leg length and deformity.
【24h】

Comparison of PACS and hard-copy 51-inch radiographs for measuring leg length and deformity.

机译:比较PACS和51英寸硬拷贝X线照片以测量腿长和畸形。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: The picture archiving and communication system (PACS) eventually will replace the use of standard hard-copy radiographs. It is unknown whether measurements of limb length discrepancy (LLD) and deformity on PACS compare in accuracy and reproducibility with those from hard-copy radiographs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared the reproducibility and reliability of LLD and deformity measurements for each of these two media. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 51-inch standing lower extremity images obtained for LLD or deformity analysis from 40 patients to compare the measurements and their reliability on hard-copy film with those performed on soft-copy PACS. Two observers independently performed measurements twice using each system at 1-week intervals to minimize interobserver or intraobserver bias. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were determined to test intraobserver and interrater reliability of Rater 1 and Rater 2. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of measurements made on hard copy ranged from 0.69 to 0.99 and PACS-derived measurements ranged from 0.66 to 0.98. Intraobserver reliability for Rater 1 for measurements made on hard copy ranged from 0.853 to 0.999 and PACS-derived measurements ranged from 0.80 to 0.996. Intraobserver reliability for Rater 2 for measurements made on hard copy ranged from 0.931 to 0.999 and PACS-derived measurements ranged from 0.962 to 0.999. CONCLUSIONS: Each system yielded comparable reliability for measurements, therefore, transition to PACS to perform measurements in patients with LLD or deformity can be made with confidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
机译:背景:图片存档和通信系统(PACS)最终将取代标准硬拷贝X射线照片的使用。尚不清楚在PACS上肢体长度差异(LLD)和畸形的测量结果是否与硬拷贝X线照片的准确性和可重复性相比较。问题/目的:我们比较了这两种介质中LLD的再现性和可靠性以及畸变测量结果。方法:我们回顾性地回顾了40例患者的用于LLD或畸形分析的51英寸站立下肢图像,以比较硬拷贝胶片和软拷贝PACS的测量结果及其可靠性。两名观察员使用每个系统以1周的间隔独立执行两次测量,以最小化观察者之间或观察者内部的偏差。确定类内相关系数(ICC)以测试Rater 1和Rater 2的观察者内和间信度。结果:在硬拷贝上进行的测量的interrater可靠性在0.69至0.99范围内,而从PACS得出的测量值在0.66至0.98范围内。评估者1在硬拷贝上进行的测量的观察者内可靠性范围为0.853至0.999,派生于PACS的测量范围为0.80至0.996。评估者2在硬拷贝上进行的测量的观察者内部可靠性范围为0.931至0.999,派生于PACS的测量范围为0.962至0.999。结论:每个系统在测量方面都具有可比的可靠性,因此,可以放心地过渡到PACS以对LLD或畸形患者进行测量。证据级别:III级,诊断研究。有关证据水平的完整说明,请参见《作者指南》。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号