Validity and Absolute Reliability of the Cobb Angle in Idiopathic Scoliosis with TraumaMeter Software.

The Cobb angle value is a critical parameter for evaluating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. This study aimed to evaluate a software's validity and absolute reliability to determine the Cobb angle in AIS digital X-rays, with two different degrees of experienced observers. Four experts and four novice evaluators measured 35 scoliotic curves with the software on three separate occasions, one month apart. The observers re-measured the same radiographic studies on three separate occasions three months later but on conventional X-ray films. The differences between the mean bias errors (MBE) within the experience groups were statistically significant between the experts (software) and novices (manual) (p < 0.001) and between the novices (software) and novices (manual) (p = 0.005). When measured with the software, the intra-group error in the expert group was MBE = 1.71 ± 0.61° and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC (2,1)) = 0.986, and in the novice group, MBE = 1.9 ± 0.67° and ICC (2,1) = 0.97. There was almost a perfect concordance among the two measurement methods, ICC (2,1) = 0.998 and minimum detectable change (MCD95) < 0.4°. Control of the intrinsic error sources enabled obtaining inter- and intra-observer MDC95 < 0.5° in the two experience groups and with the two measurement methods. The computer-aided software TraumaMeter increases the validity and reliability of Cobb angle measurements concerning manual measurement.

Validity and reliability of a computer-assisted system method to measure axial vertebral rotation.

Background: Axial vertebral rotation and Cobb's angle are essential parameters for analysing adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. This study's scope evaluates the validity and absolute reliability of application software based on a new mathematical equation to determine the axial vertebral rotation in digital X-rays according to Raimondi's method in evaluators with different degrees of experience. Methods: Twelve independent evaluators with different experience levels measured 33 scoliotic curves in 21 X-rays with the software on three separate occasions, separated one month. Using the same methodology, the observers re-measured the same radiographic studies three months later but on X-ray films and in a conventional way. Results: Both methods show good validity and reliability, and the intraclass correlation coefficients are almost perfect. According to our results, the software increases 1.7 times the validity and 1.9 times the absolute reliability of axial vertebral rotation on digital X-rays according to Raimondi's method, compared to the conventional manual measurement. Conclusions: The intra-group and inter-group agreement of the measurements with the software shows equal or minor variations than with the manual method, among the different measurement sessions and in the three experience groups. There is almost perfect agreement between the two measurement methods, so the equation and the software may be helpful to increase the accuracy in the axial vertebral rotation assessment.