评估 Sauvegrain 法与 Greulich 和 Pyle 法之间的骨龄一致性。

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Acta Ortopedica Brasileira Pub Date : 2024-10-07 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1413-785220243204e278912
Beatriz Nogueira Leite, João Vitor Nogueira Rubez, Carlos Alberto Arruda Soufen, Bruna Zanetti Pereira, Marcos Vinicius Felix Santana, Eiffel Tsuyoshi Dobashi
{"title":"评估 Sauvegrain 法与 Greulich 和 Pyle 法之间的骨龄一致性。","authors":"Beatriz Nogueira Leite, João Vitor Nogueira Rubez, Carlos Alberto Arruda Soufen, Bruna Zanetti Pereira, Marcos Vinicius Felix Santana, Eiffel Tsuyoshi Dobashi","doi":"10.1590/1413-785220243204e278912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the intra and inter observer agreement of the Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This is an observational, retrospective and cross-sectional study ethically approved by opinion 6,192,391. 100 radiographic images of the elbow and 100 of the left wrist and hand were collected from children whose images were selected by a researcher who did not carry out the evaluations. The Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods were used to determine bone age. We provided a detailed explanation of each method and the evaluators received a file with the study images. After three weeks, the exams were randomized and the radiograms were reevaluated. Of the 100 patients in group A, 61 (61%) were boys and 39 (39%) were girls. In group B, 67 (67%) were boys and 33 (33%) were girls.</p><p><strong>Four statistical analyzes were used: </strong>correlation; intraclass correlation; analysis using the Bland-Altman graph; differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intra and interobserver agreement between groups was considered excellent.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the excellent agreement, group A presented a significantly better value than B. Biological ages show a greater difference compared to chronological ages in group A. In group B, skeletal and chronological ages do not show statistical difference according to the accuracy test. <b><i>Level of Evidence III, Cross-Sectional Observational Study.</i></b></p>","PeriodicalId":55563,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11460657/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ASSESSEMENT OF BONE AGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAUVEGRAIN AND GREULICH AND PYLE METHODS.\",\"authors\":\"Beatriz Nogueira Leite, João Vitor Nogueira Rubez, Carlos Alberto Arruda Soufen, Bruna Zanetti Pereira, Marcos Vinicius Felix Santana, Eiffel Tsuyoshi Dobashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1413-785220243204e278912\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the intra and inter observer agreement of the Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This is an observational, retrospective and cross-sectional study ethically approved by opinion 6,192,391. 100 radiographic images of the elbow and 100 of the left wrist and hand were collected from children whose images were selected by a researcher who did not carry out the evaluations. The Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods were used to determine bone age. We provided a detailed explanation of each method and the evaluators received a file with the study images. After three weeks, the exams were randomized and the radiograms were reevaluated. Of the 100 patients in group A, 61 (61%) were boys and 39 (39%) were girls. In group B, 67 (67%) were boys and 33 (33%) were girls.</p><p><strong>Four statistical analyzes were used: </strong>correlation; intraclass correlation; analysis using the Bland-Altman graph; differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intra and interobserver agreement between groups was considered excellent.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the excellent agreement, group A presented a significantly better value than B. Biological ages show a greater difference compared to chronological ages in group A. In group B, skeletal and chronological ages do not show statistical difference according to the accuracy test. <b><i>Level of Evidence III, Cross-Sectional Observational Study.</i></b></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11460657/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220243204e278912\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220243204e278912","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估 Sauvegrain、Greulich 和 Pyle 方法在观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性:这是一项观察性、回顾性和横断面研究,已获得第 6,192,391 号伦理意见批准。研究人员从儿童身上收集了 100 张肘部和 100 张左手腕和手部的 X 射线图像,并对这些图像进行了筛选,但研究人员并未对这些图像进行评估。采用 Sauvegrain、Greulich 和 Pyle 三种方法确定骨龄。我们对每种方法都进行了详细说明,评估人员也收到了一份包含研究图像的文件。三周后,我们对检查进行了随机分组,并对放射线照片进行了重新评估。在 A 组的 100 名患者中,61 名(61%)是男孩,39 名(39%)是女孩。B组中,67(67%)人为男孩,33(33%)人为女孩。采用了四种统计分析方法:相关性;类内相关性;布兰-阿尔特曼图分析;组间差异:结果:各组之间的观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性非常好:A组的生物年龄与年代年龄相比差异较大,B组的骨骼年龄和年代年龄在准确性测试中没有统计学差异。证据等级 III,横断面观察研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ASSESSEMENT OF BONE AGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAUVEGRAIN AND GREULICH AND PYLE METHODS.

Objective: To evaluate the intra and inter observer agreement of the Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods.

Material and methods: This is an observational, retrospective and cross-sectional study ethically approved by opinion 6,192,391. 100 radiographic images of the elbow and 100 of the left wrist and hand were collected from children whose images were selected by a researcher who did not carry out the evaluations. The Sauvegrain, Greulich and Pyle methods were used to determine bone age. We provided a detailed explanation of each method and the evaluators received a file with the study images. After three weeks, the exams were randomized and the radiograms were reevaluated. Of the 100 patients in group A, 61 (61%) were boys and 39 (39%) were girls. In group B, 67 (67%) were boys and 33 (33%) were girls.

Four statistical analyzes were used: correlation; intraclass correlation; analysis using the Bland-Altman graph; differences between groups.

Results: Intra and interobserver agreement between groups was considered excellent.

Conclusions: Despite the excellent agreement, group A presented a significantly better value than B. Biological ages show a greater difference compared to chronological ages in group A. In group B, skeletal and chronological ages do not show statistical difference according to the accuracy test. Level of Evidence III, Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: A Revista Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, órgão oficial do Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (DOT/FMUSP), é publicada bimestralmente em seis edições ao ano (jan/fev, mar/abr, maio/jun, jul/ago, set/out e nov/dez) com versão em inglês disponível nos principais indexadores nacionais e internacionais e instituições de ensino do Brasil. Sendo hoje reconhecidamente uma importante contribuição para os especialistas da área com sua seriedade e árduo trabalho para as indexações já conquistadas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信