Cargando…

Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements

Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy rad...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meng, Hong‐Zheng, Zhang, Wei‐Lin, Li, Xiu‐Cheng, Yang, Mao‐Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6680276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25763918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.22872
_version_ 1783441466395197440
author Meng, Hong‐Zheng
Zhang, Wei‐Lin
Li, Xiu‐Cheng
Yang, Mao‐Wei
author_facet Meng, Hong‐Zheng
Zhang, Wei‐Lin
Li, Xiu‐Cheng
Yang, Mao‐Wei
author_sort Meng, Hong‐Zheng
collection PubMed
description Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra‐observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter‐observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced. © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:1250–1254, 2015.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6680276
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66802762019-08-09 Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements Meng, Hong‐Zheng Zhang, Wei‐Lin Li, Xiu‐Cheng Yang, Mao‐Wei J Orthop Res Research Articles Radiographic angles are used to assess the severity of hallux valgus deformity, make preoperative plans, evaluate outcomes after surgery, and compare results between different methods. Traditionally, hallux valgus angle (HVA) has been measured by using a protractor and a marker pen with hardcopy radiographs. The main objective of this study is to compare HVA measurements performed using a smartphone and a traditional protractor. The secondary objective was to compare the time taken between those two methods. Six observers measured major HVA on 20 radiographs of hallux valgus deformity with both a standard protractor and an Apple iPhone. Four of the observers repeated the measurements at least a week after the original measurements. The mean absolute difference between pairs of protractor and smartphone measurements was 3.2°. The 95% confidence intervals for intra‐observer variability were ±3.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±3.2° for the protractor method. The 95% confidence intervals for inter‐observer variability were ±9.1° for the smartphone measurement and ±9.6° for the protractor measurement. We conclude that the smartphone is equivalent to the protractor for the accuracy of HVA measurement. But, the time taken in smartphone measurement was also reduced. © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:1250–1254, 2015. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-08 2015-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6680276/ /pubmed/25763918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.22872 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Orthopaedic Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Meng, Hong‐Zheng
Zhang, Wei‐Lin
Li, Xiu‐Cheng
Yang, Mao‐Wei
Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title_full Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title_fullStr Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title_full_unstemmed Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title_short Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: Comparison between protractor and iPhone measurements
title_sort radiographic angles in hallux valgus: comparison between protractor and iphone measurements
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6680276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25763918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jor.22872
work_keys_str_mv AT menghongzheng radiographicanglesinhalluxvalguscomparisonbetweenprotractorandiphonemeasurements
AT zhangweilin radiographicanglesinhalluxvalguscomparisonbetweenprotractorandiphonemeasurements
AT lixiucheng radiographicanglesinhalluxvalguscomparisonbetweenprotractorandiphonemeasurements
AT yangmaowei radiographicanglesinhalluxvalguscomparisonbetweenprotractorandiphonemeasurements