ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2015
Differences between the alpha angles measured manually and digitally from paediatric hip ultrasonograms.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to reveal whether a meaningful difference is caused by measuring the alpha angle in hip ultrasonography manually or digitally to help the early diagnosis and treatment of DDH and observe the treatment implications of any such difference. All ultrasound images were obtained by same orthopaedist, and each hip was measured twice by two investigators with different levels of experience. Standard images were taken, and a printout of the standard images were obtained. The alpha angle was measured digitally by using the sonography device. The alpha angle was also measured by pencil, ruler and goniometer on the printout after 2 days. One hundred and two hips of 51 babies, at a mean age of 14 weeks, were assessed. The mean alpha angle measured manually with a goniometer was 64.4° (±1.6°), while that measured on the ultrasonography device was 65.3° (±0.9°). This difference was found to be statistically different (p = 0.016). Typology changes occurred in a total of 10 hips out of 102 as a result of manual and digital measurements. However, this study showed reduction in alpha angle variation and considerable advantages for manual alpha angle measurement with pencil and goniometer on a printout compared to computer-based measurement; future studies are needed to understand these differences caused by each measurement method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25869106What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.