SPINE SCANER: RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT OF OBSERVATION RESULTS
https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2006.1.77-87
Abstract
Objective. The assessment of reliability of data obtained using a firmware domestic complex Spine Scaner.
Material and Methods. Fifty four healthy volunteers have been examined. Criteria for inclusion in the study were the absence of orthopedic pathology, and the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores being 0. Two independent observers with a different skill level performed the study. Intraobserver and interobserver data repeatability was assessed by the analysis of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and reliability coefficient for each of 31 tested parameters.
Results. The observation without fixation of a patient exhibited a low repeatability, with a correlation coefficient being 0.39. Other observation stages showed the acceptable ICC mean values. The best repeatability was achieved in the study performed by the same observer, with the ICC value beiing 0.86. The interobserver repeatability had the lesser values: 0.61 for independent identification of anatomic references and 0.77 for the references identified by one of the observers.
Conclusion. The Spine Scaner can be used in clinical practice for defining a shape and spatial orientation of the spine under the following conditions: a reliable fixation of the patient’s trunk, wide experience of the observer, and a strict adherence to the study protocol.
About the Authors
Evgeny Arkadyevich Cherepanov
Novisibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksandr Vjacheslavovich Gladkov
Novisibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yaroslav Sergeyevich Titarenko
Novisibirsk Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Алексеев И.Г., Некрасова Т.С., Пироженко А.В. и др. Трехмерный функциональный сканер позвоночника как инструмент диагностики и контроля мануального терапевта // Мануальная терапия. 2002. № 4. С. 30.
2. Васильева Л.Ф. Мануальная диагностика и терапия (клиническая биомеханика и патобиомеханика). Руководство для врачей. СПб., 1999.
3. Гланц С. Медико-биологическая статистика. М., 1998.
4. Назаренко Г.И., Героева И.Б., Черкашев А.М. Оценка функции позвоночника при помощи ультразвукового трехмерного анализатора движений // VII съезд ортопедов-травматологов России: Тез. докл. Новосибирск, 2001. С. 261.
5. Ситель А.Б. Мануальная терапия. Руководство для врачей. М., 1998.
6. Cortet B., Houvenagel E., Puisieux F., et al. Spinal curvatures and quality of life in women with vertebral fractures secondary to osteoporosis // Spine. 1999. Vol. 24. N 18. P. 1921–1925.
7. Jordan K., Dziedzic K., Jones P.W., et al. The reliability of the three-dimensional FASTRAK measurement system in measuring cervical spine and shoulder range of motion in healthy subjects // Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000. Vol. 39. N 4. P. 382–388.
8. Eliasziw M., Young S.L., Woodbury M.G., et al. Statistical methodology for the concurrent assessment of interrater and intrarater reliability: using goniometric measurements as an example // Phys. Ther. 1994. Vol. 74. N 8. P. 777–788.
9. Mootz R.D., Keating J.C.Jr., Kontz H.P., et al. Intra- and interobserver reliability of passive motion palpation of the lumbar spine // J. Manipulative Physiol. Ther. 1989. Vol. 12. N 6. P. 440–445.
10. Keller S., Mannion A., Grob D. Reliability of a new measuring device („spinal mouse“) in recording the sagittal profile of the back// Eur. Spine. J. 2000. Vol. 9. N 4. P. 321.
11. Letts M., Quanbury A., Gouw G., et al. Computerized ultrasonic digitization in the measurement of spinal curvature // Spine. 1988. Vol. 13. N 10. P. 1106–1110.
12. Mannion A., Troke M. A comparison of two motion analysis devices used in the measurement of lumbar spinal mobility // Clin. Biomech. (Bristol, Avon). 1999. Vol. 14. N 9. P. 612–619.
13. Mannion A.F., Knecht K., Balaban G., et al. A new skin-surface device for measuring the curvature and global and segmental ranges of motion of the spine: reliability of measurements and comparison with data reviewed from the literature // Eur. Spine J. 2004. Vol. 13. N 2. P. 122–136.
14. Morin Doody M., Lonstein J.E., Stovall M., et al. Breast cancer mortality after diagnostic radiography: findings from the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study // Spine. 2000. Vol. 25. N 16. P. 2052–2063.
15. Ovadia D., Fragniere B., Dickman D., et al. A new approach for scoliosis assessment preliminary results// EuroSpine 2002. Abstracts of the 4th Annual Meeting of the Spine Society of Europe. September 11–14, 2002. Nantes, France. Р. 15.
16. Castro W.H., Sautmann A., Schilgen M., et al. Noninvasive three-dimensional analysis of cervical spine motion in normal subjects in relation to age and sex. An experimental examination // Spine. 2000. Vol. 25. N 4. P. 443–449.
17. Seichert N., Senn E. Sagittal shape and mobility of the spine-nalidity and reliability of the new MediMouse®/SpinalMouse®// Eur. Spine. J. 2000. Vol. 9. N 4. Р. 331.
18. Seichert N., Knorr H., Baumann M., et al. The "Spinal Mouse" – a new device to measure the spine’s shape and mobility // 12th Word Congress IFPMR, Sydney. 1995. Р. 125.
Review
For citations:
Cherepanov E.A., Gladkov A.V., Titarenko Ya.S. SPINE SCANER: RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT OF OBSERVATION RESULTS. Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika). 2006;(1):077-087. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2006.1.77-87
Email this article 