These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A quantitative and reproducible method to assess cord compression and canal stenosis after cervical spine trauma: a study of interrater and intrarater reliability.
    Author: Furlan JC, Fehlings MG, Massicotte EM, Aarabi B, Vaccaro AR, Bono CM, Madrazo I, Villanueva C, Grauer JN, Mikulis D.
    Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 Sep 01; 32(19):2083-91. PubMed ID: 17762809.
    Abstract:
    STUDY DESIGN: Reliability study. OBJECTIVE: To assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of a recently described technique to measure of maximum canal compromise (MCC) and maximum spinal cord compression (MSCC) using digitized and magnified images in the setting of traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The extent of MCC and MSCC is of clinical and prognostic value in the setting of traumatic cervical SCI. However, concerns remain regarding the accuracy of measurements based on hard copy images. We hypothesized that the interrater and intrarater reliability of these assessments would be enhanced using magnified digitized images and software-based measurement tools. METHODS: Midsagittal MRI and CT images of cervical spine were selected from 5 individuals with acute traumatic cervical SCI. Measurements of MCC using CT scan and T1-weighted MRI and measurements of MSCC based on T2-weighted MR images were independently estimated by 13 raters on 10 occasions. RESULTS: The intrarater reliability for CT-MCC, T1-weighted MRI-MCC and T2-weighted MRI-MSCC was high in the 10 rounds in each patient. In addition, the mean intrarater interclass correlation coefficient was 0.72 +/- 0.05 for the CT-MCC, 0.70 +/- 0.07 for the T1-weighted MRI-MCC, and 0.68 +/- 0.11 for the T2-weighted MRI-MSCC. The mean interrater interclass correlation coefficients were 0.43 +/- 0.02 for the CT-MCC, 0.61 +/- 0.03 for the T1-weighted MRI-MCC, and 0.55 +/- 0.05 for the evaluation of T2-weighted MRI-MSCC. CONCLUSION: Our study has demonstrated that the intrarater reliability for the instrument to assess MCC and MSCC in the setting of traumatic SCI was high. The interrater ICCs at a moderate level of reliability combined with our results using analysis of variance with post hoc tests indicate that the measurements of MCC and MSCC are reproducible, which supports the use of these radiologic parameters in the clinical and research settings.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]