Skip to main content
Log in

Accuracy of visually estimated bone mineratization in routine radiographs of the lower extremity

  • Articles
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to determine the accuracy of reports of demineralization based on observations of routine radiographs of the peripheral skeleton, paris of radiographs with known difference in bone mineral density (BMD) were shown to a panel of medically qualified observers. No significant difference in the rate of correct identification of osteopenia of metaphyseal and diaphyseal bone was observed. Experienced observers were more accurate than their juniors. The probability of correct identification was greater than 0.5 at all levels of BMD difference, and in general increased with increasing BMD differences, reaching a probability of 0.6 at a BMD difference of 30%. The probability increased considerably when the essesment relied on the majority vote of three or more observers. It is concluded that it is inadvisable for a single observer to judge BMD when studying routine X-ray studies of the peripheral skeleton.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andresen J, Nielsen HE (1986) Assessment of bone mineral content and bone mass by non-invasive radiologie methods. Acta Radiol [Diagn] (Stockh) 27:609

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ardran GM (1951) Bone destruction not demonstrable by radiography. Br J Radiol 24:107

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barnett E, Nordin BEC (1960) The radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis: A new approach. Clin Radiol 11:166

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bloom PA (1980) A comparative estimation of combined cortical thickness of various bone sites. Skeletal Radiol 5:167

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cockshott WP, Park WM (1983) Observer variation in skeletal radiology. Skeletal Radiol 10:86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fusi DG (1953) Saggio sperimentale sulle prime manifestazioni radiologiche di osteoporosi. Radiol Clin 22: 123

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Geusens P, Dequeker J, Verstraeten A, Nijs J (1986) Age-, sex-, and menopause-related changes of vertebral and peripheral bone: Population study using dual and single photon absorptiometry and radiogrammatry. J Nucl Med 27:1540

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnston CC, Epstein S (1981) Clinical, biochemical, radiographic, epidemiologic, and economic features of osteoporosis. Orthop Clin North Am 12:559

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Krokowski E (1966) Möglichkeiten zur Bestimmung des Skelett-Calciumgehaltes in der Klinik. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 91:60

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lachman E (1955) Osteoporosis: The potentialities and limitations of its roentgenologic diagnosis. AJR 74:712

    Google Scholar 

  11. Naucler LOW, Nilsson BE, Westlin NE (1974) An apparatus for gamma absorptiometry of bone — Technical data. Orpuscula Medico-Technica Lundensia 12

  12. Reifenstein EC (1957) Definitions, terminology and classification of metabolic bone disorders. Clin Orthop 9:30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Riggs BL (1984) Assessment of bone mineral. Part 1. J Nucl Med 25:1134

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Riggs BL (1984) Assessment of bone mineral. Part 2. J Nucl Med 25:1241

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Finsen, V., Anda, S. Accuracy of visually estimated bone mineratization in routine radiographs of the lower extremity. Skeletal Radiol 17, 270–275 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401810

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401810

Key words

Navigation