Reliability analysis of a smartphone-aided measurement method for the cobb angle of scoliosis

Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2012, Pages

  Qiao, Jun ^a   Liu, Zhen ^a   Xu, Leilei ^a   Wu, Tao ^a   Zheng, Xin ^a   Zhu, Zezhang ^a   Zhu, Feng ^a   Qian, Bangpin ^a   Qiu, Yong ^a  

^a MEDICAL SCHOOL OF NANJING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; manual measurement; reliability; smartphone aided measurement

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COBB ANGLE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MOBILE PHONE; PARAMETERS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; STANDARD; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 84862809570     PISSN: 15360652     EISSN: 15392465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182463964     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Cobb JR. Outline for the study of scoliosis. Instr Course Lect. 1948;5:261-275.
2. Carman DL, Browne RH, Birch JG. Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs. Intraobserver and interobserver variation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:328-333.
3. Geijer H, Beckman K, Jonsson B, et al. Digital radiography of scoliosis with a scanning method: initial evaluation. Radiology. 2001;218:402-410.
4. Geijer H, Verdonck B, Beckman KW, et al. Digital radiography of scoliosis with a scanning method: radiation dose optimization. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:543-551.
5. Gross C, Gross M, Kuschner S. Error analysis of scoliosis curvature measurement. Bull Hosp Jt Dis Orthop Inst. 1983;43:171-177.
6. Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Schroeder TM, et al. Comparison of manual and digital measurements in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2006;31:1240-1246.
7. Shea KG, Stevens PM, Nelson M, et al. A comparison of manual versus computer-aided radiographic measurement intraobserver measurement variability for Cobb angles. Spine. 1998; 23:551-555.
8. Franko OI. Smartphone apps for orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:2042-2048.
9. Fleiss JL. Reliability of measurement. In: Fleiss JL, ed. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. Toronto: Wiley; 1986:1-32.
10. Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, et al. Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:1587-1592.
11. Wills BP, Auerbach JD, Zhu X, et al. Comparison of Cobb angle measurement of scoliosis radiographs with preselected end vertebrae: traditional versus digital acquisition. Spine. 2007;32:98-105.
12. Zhang J, Lou E, Shi X, et al. A computer-aided Cobb angle measurement method and its reliability. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010;23:383-387.
13. Ylikoski M, Tallroth K. Measurement variation in scoliotic angle, vertebral rotation, vertebral body height, and intervertebral disc space height. J Spinal Disord Tech. 1990;3:387-391.
14. Adam CJ, Izatt MT, Harvey JR, et al. Variability in Cobb angle measurement using reformatted computerized tomography scans. Spine. 2005;30:1664-1669.
15. Rosenfeldt MP, Harding IJ, Hauptfleisch JT, et al. A comparison of traditional protractor versus Oxford Cobbometer radiographic measurement. Spine. 2005;30:440-443.
16. Zhang J, Lou E, Hill DL, et al. Computer-aided assessment of scoliosis on posteroanterior radiographs. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2010;48:185-195.