Browse > Article

Computerized Measurement on Angular Parameters for Hallux Valgus: Comparison of 100% and 150% Magnified Digital Radiography  

Sung, Il-Hoon (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
Lee, Doo-Yeon (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
Sung, Chang-Ho (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
Seo, Woo-Young (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Foot and Ankle Society / v.16, no.1, 2012 , pp. 53-57 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: To study computerized measurements of angular parameters on 100% and 150% resized digital radiography of hallux valgus deformity Materials and Methods: 30 digital radiography of standing foot anteroposterior view of hallux valgus patients were included. Two observers(A, B) independently measured hallux valgus angle (HVA), 1-2 intermetatarsal angle (IMA), and distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA) in two times on both 100%-size and 150% magnified images respectively, using computerized measurement software tools. The results were interpreted with the statistical software program, Statistical Analysis System, version 9.2. Results: In repeated measurements of each observer, measurements on 150% magnified image showed no differences of all three parameters and with 100%-size image, there were differences of HVA (observer A) and 1-2 IMA (observer B) (p>0.05). When testing interobserver reliability, both observers showed differences in measurement of HVA and DMAA (p<0.05), but no differences in measurement of 1-2 IMA in both images. Within the 95% confidence interval, limits of error of measurements between two observers on HVA, IMA and DMAA were $2.7^{\circ}$ $1.4^{\circ}$ and $5.0^{\circ}$ respectively in 100%-size images, and $2.6^{\circ}$, $1.6^{\circ}$ and $4.7^{\circ}$ respectively in 150% magnified images. Conclusion: In computerized measurements for angular parameters of hallux valgus with digital radiography, 150% magnified images showed intraobserver reliability. Both 100% and 150% magnified images failed to show interobserver reliability. Measurement of 1-2 IMA in both 100% and 150% images showed less interobserver error.
Keywords
Hallux valgus; Angular parameters; Computerized measurement;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Bordelon RL. Evaluation and operative procedures for hallux valgus deformity. Orthopedics.1987;10:38-44.
2 Coughlin MJ, Mann RA, Saltzman CL. Surgery of the foot and ankle. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. 183-362.
3 Mann RA. Bunion surgery: decision making. Orthopedics. 1990;13:951-7.
4 Pique-Vidal C, Maled-Garcia I, Arabi-Moreno J, Vila J. Radiographic angles in hallux valgus: differences between measurements made manually and with a computerized program. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:175-80.   DOI
5 Hur G, Hwang YJ, Cha SJ, Kim SY, Kim YH. Optimization of digital mammography resolution using magnification technique in computed radiography. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2004;50:447-52.   DOI
6 Coughlin MJ, Saltzman CL, Nunley JA 2nd. Angular measurements in the evaluation of hallux valgus deformities: a report of the ad hoc committee of the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society on angular measurements. Foot Ankle Int. 2002;23:68-74.   DOI
7 Coughlin MJ, Jones CP. Hallux valgus: demographics, etiology, and radiographic assessment. Foot Ankle Int. 2007;28:759-77.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Pisano ED, Cole EB, Hemminger BM, et al. Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay. Radiographics. 2000;20:1479-91.   DOI
9 De Carvalho A, Vialle R, Thomsen L, et al. Reliability analysis for manual measurement of coronal plane deformity in adolescent scoliosis. Are 30 x 90 cm plain films better than digitized small films? Eur Spine J. 2007;16:1615-20.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Van Vo H, Safiedine AM, Short T, Merrill T. A comparison of 4 common methods of hand-measured techniques with a computerized technique to measure the first intermetatarsal angle. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2004;43:395-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Lin JS, Bustillo J. Surgical treatment of hallux valgus: a review. Curr Opin Orthop. 2007;18:112-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Bargman J, Corless JR, Gross AE, Lange F. A review of surgical procedure for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle. 1980;1:39-43.   DOI
13 Coughlin MJ. Roger A. Mann Award. Juvenile hallux valgus: etiology and treatment. Foot Ankle Int. 1995;16:682-97.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Kang CN, Choi KJ, Lee DY, Sung IH. The computerized measurement for the radiological severity of hallux valgus. J Korean Foot Ankle Soc. 2009;13:1-6.
15 Schneider W, Csepan R, Kasparek M, Pinggera O, Knahr K. Intra- and interobserver repeatability of radiographic measurements in hallux surgery: improvement and validation of a method. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002;73:670-3.
16 Panchbhavi VK, Trevino S. Comparison between manual and computer-assisted measurements of hallux valgus parameters. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25:708-11.   DOI
17 Resch S, Ryd L, Stenstrom A, Johnsson K, Reynisson K. Measuring hallux valgus: a comparison of conventional radiography and clinical parameters with regard to measurement accuracy. Foot Ankle Int. 1995;16:267-70.   DOI   ScienceOn