ArticleCureus2024
Analyzing the Accuracy of Digital Sizing on Long-Leg Alignment X-rays by Using a 1-Inch Ball Bearing: A Cheap and Effective Method.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Sizing on digital films is important for implants and planning deformity correction. CT is the most accurate digital measurement method. We use a 1-inch ball bearing (cost: $1) to size our long-leg standing films (LLSFs) when planning deformity correction. In this study, we aimed to assess the accuracy of digital measurements calibrated by this method. Methods We conducted An IRB-approved study involving 25 patients having both an LLSF with a 1-inch ball bearing taped to the inner mid-thigh and a CT scanogram. The longest distance in the axial cut of the bilateral ankle, knee, and femoral heads of the CT images were compared to the same anatomic locations on LLSFs calibrated with the ball bearing using the online digital planning software DetroitBonesetter (DBS) and measurements from our Picture Archiving Communication Software (PACS). Five observers performed each measurement. Results The average measurement differences between the gold standard CT scan and LLSFs calibrated with DBS were as follows: 0.110 ± 0.432 mm (femoral head); 2.173 ± 0.0619 mm (knee); and 3.671 ± 0.30 mm (ankle). In PACS, they were as follows: 5.470 ± 0.381 mm (femoral head); 6.248 ± 0.712 mm (knee); and 1.806 ± 0.548 mm (ankle). The intraclass correlation coefficient for 600 measurements by five observers was 0.972. Conclusions The $1 ball-bearing sizing on DBS using LLSFs provides accuracy to <1 mm for the femoral head, 2 mm at the knee, and 3.7 mm at the ankle. It was significantly better than the PACS system for both the femoral head and knee (<0.001), while PACS was better at the ankle (<0.001).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.