Quantifying of avascular necrosis of femoral head The clinical problem Determining the risk of femoral head collapse in a patient with AVNFH.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Daniel J. Berry, MD Professor and Chairman Dept of Orthopedic Surgery
Advertisements

Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the Family Conference OSCE Across Multiple Training Sites Jeffrey G. Chipman MD, Constance C. Schmitz PhD, Travis.
Measurement the process by which we test hypotheses and theories. assesses traits and abilities by means other than testing obtains information by comparing.
MRI of the Pediatric Knee
Sajan JA, Tibesar R, Jabbour N, Lander T, Hilger P, Sidman J
Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 12 Measures of Association.
Measurement. Scales of Measurement Stanley S. Stevens’ Five Criteria for Four Scales Nominal Scales –1. numbers are assigned to objects according to rules.
Systemic inflammatory response syndrome score at admission independently predicts mortality and length of stay in trauma patients. by R2 黃信豪.
15 de Abril de A Meta-Analysis is a review in which bias has been reduced by the systematic identification, appraisal, synthesis and statistical.
Reliability and Validity Dr. Roy Cole Department of Geography and Planning GVSU.
Concept of Measurement
RELIABILITY consistency or reproducibility of a test score (or measurement)
Using Hierarchical Growth Models to Monitor School Performance: The effects of the model, metric and time on the validity of inferences THE 34TH ANNUAL.
EVALUATION OF DR.MOHAMMED AL NAAMI, FRCSC, FACS, M Ed. Using O bjective S tructured C linical E xamination (OSCE)
Chapter 9 Flashcards. measurement method that uses uniform procedures to collect, score, interpret, and report numerical results; usually has norms and.
Total Lesion Glycolysis by 18 F-FDG PET/CT a Reliable Predictor of Prognosis in Soft Tissue Sarcoma Ilkyu Han Musculoskeletal Tumor Center, Seoul National.
CORRELATIO NAL RESEARCH METHOD. The researcher wanted to determine if there is a significant relationship between the nursing personnel characteristics.
Chapter Four: Nonexperimental Methods I: Descriptive Methods, Qualitative Research, and Correlational Studies Chapter Four: Nonexperimental Methods I:
Screening and Early Detection Epidemiological Basis for Disease Control – Fall 2001 Joel L. Weissfeld, M.D. M.P.H.
1 of 27 PSYC 4310/6310 Advanced Experimental Methods and Statistics © 2013, Michael Kalsher Michael J. Kalsher Department of Cognitive Science Adv. Experimental.
The authors would like to acknowledge the nursing staff that participated at all three locations. Without their support, many things would not be possible.
Jaw Pain: Characteristics and Prevalence in Fibromyalgia and other Rheumatic Disorders Robert S. Katz 1, Frederick Wolfe 2. 1 Rush University Med Center,
Instrumentation.
Unanswered Questions in Typical Literature Review 1. Thoroughness – How thorough was the literature search? – Did it include a computer search and a hand.
Understanding Statistics
BACKGROUND Health Care Attitudes and Trends among the Pediatric Prescribing Community Mahesh Narayan 1 MB, MSE, Dimple Patel 1 MS, Peter C. Adamson 1,2,3.
Reliability of Screening Tests RELIABILITY: The extent to which the screening test will produce the same or very similar results each time it is administered.
Chapter 2 Research in Abnormal Psychology. Slide 2 Research in Abnormal Psychology  Clinical researchers face certain challenges that make their investigations.
Metabolic Syndrome and Recurrence within the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay Risk Categories in Lymph Node Negative Breast Cancer Lakhani A et al. Proc.
Analysis of Intra-observer's Repeatability in Retinopathy's Classification of patients with, both, Clear and Yellow IOL's implantation INTRODUCTION METHODS.
Assessment in Education Patricia O’Sullivan Office of Educational Development UAMS.
Correlational Research Chapter Fifteen Bring Schraw et al.
S14: Analytical Review and Audit Approaches. Session Objectives To define analytical review To define analytical review To explain commonly used analytical.
EVIDENCE ABOUT DIAGNOSTIC TESTS Min H. Huang, PT, PhD, NCS.
Hui Taek Kim, MD and Seong Ho Bae, MD Pediatric Orthopaedic Unit
Risk Assessment Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D.. Session Objectives 1.Discuss the role of risk assessment in the TQM process. 2.Describe the five severity indices.
Discriminant Analysis Discriminant analysis is a technique for analyzing data when the criterion or dependent variable is categorical and the predictor.
Evaluating Risk Adjustment Models Andy Bindman MD Department of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics.
Research Methodology and Methods of Social Inquiry Nov 8, 2011 Assessing Measurement Reliability & Validity.
M Itani a, B Taslakian a, N. Batley b, M. Saliba b, E. Hitti b, F El-Merhi a Departments of Radiology a and Emergency Medicine b American University of.
INTEROBSERVER AND INTRAOBSERVER VARIABILITY IN THE C-EOS. COMPARISON BETWEEN EXPERIENCED SPINE SURGEONS AND TRAINEES. María del Mar Pozo-Balado, PhD José.
Inter-rater Reliability of Clinical Ratings: A Brief Primer on Kappa Daniel H. Mathalon, Ph.D., M.D. Department of Psychiatry Yale University School of.
Classification of Early Onset Scoliosis (C-EOS) Has Almost Perfect Inter and Intra Observer Reliability Micaela Cyr, BA Tricia St. Hilaire, MPH Zhaoxing.
Validation and Refinement of a Prediction Rule to Identify Children at Low Risk for Acute Appendicitis Kharbanda AB, Dudley NC, Bajaj L, et al; Pediatric.
Analytical Review and Audit Approaches
Postoperative Assessment of Rotator Cuff Integrity by Ultrasonography (US) in Comparison with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) P Collin ; M yoshida; T.
Significant Prognostic Impact of [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET Scan Performed During and at the End of Treatment with R-CHOP in High- Tumor Mass Follicular.
Reliability and Reproducibility of Dens Fracture Classification with Use of Plain Radiography and Reformatted Computer-Aided Tomography by Lance Barker,
Subchondral Fatigue Fracture of the Femoral Head in Military Recruits by Won Seok Song, Jeong Joon Yoo, Kyung-Hoi Koo, Kang Sup Yoon, Young-Min Kim, and.
COMPARATIVE LATERALIZING ABILITY of MULTIMODALITY MR IMAGING in TEMPORAL LOBE EPILEPSY ¹ Karabekir Ercan, M.D. ¹ ¹ H.Pinar Gunbey, M.D. ¹ ¹ Elcin Zan,
Peripheral Artery Disease in Orthopaedic Patients with Asymptomatic Popliteal Artery Calcification on Plain X-ray Adam Podet, MS; Julia Volaufova, phD,;
Project VIABLE - Direct Behavior Rating: Evaluating Behaviors with Positive and Negative Definitions Rose Jaffery 1, Albee T. Ongusco 3, Amy M. Briesch.
Oncology Institute of Vojvodina Department of anaesthesiology and intensive care Institutski put 4, Sremska Kamenica, SERBIA
CRITICALLY APPRAISING EVIDENCE Lisa Broughton, PhD, RN, CCRN.
OBJECTIVE INTRODUCTION Emergency Medicine Milestones: Longitudinal Interrater Agreement EM milestones were developed by EM experts for the Accreditation.
Statistics & Evidence-Based Practice
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Presentation # : eP-128 A Novel Imaging Measurement Identifying Patients with Orbital Floor Fracture Requiring Surgical Repair Taheri, MR1; Rudolph, M2;
Metabolic Syndrome and Progression of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Chapter 12 Understanding Research Results: Description and Correlation
Validation and Evaluation of Algorithms
Nicole Michael, BA John Smith, MD Tricia St. Hilaire, MPH
Radiographic Prevalence of Concomitant Scaphotrapezial Arthritis with Thumb Carpometacarpal Arthritis (Abstract # 8192) Deana Mercer, MD; Charlotte Orr,
Instrumentation: Reliability Measuring Caring in Nursing
Natalie Robinson Centre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine
Improved Patient Outcomes Best Available Clinical Evidence Patient’s
Preliminary Investigation of the Clinical Significance of Detecting Circulating Tumor Cells Enriched from Lung Cancer Patients  Chi Wu, MD, Huaijie Hao,
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Please let me introduce myself
UOG Journal Club: March 2012
HIPVASC Results and MRI Update
Presentation transcript:

Quantifying of avascular necrosis of femoral head The clinical problem Determining the risk of femoral head collapse in a patient with AVNFH

Step 1. Asking an answerable question In a 36-year-old woman with a 1-year history of avascular necrosis of femoral head, what is the risk for developing femoral head collaspse( Ficat stage III)? In a 36-year-old woman with a 1-year history of avascular necrosis of femoral head, what is the risk for developing femoral head collaspse( Ficat stage III)?

Step 2 Selecting an evidence resource

Quantifying the Extent of Femoral Head Involvement in Osteonecrosis By SEBASTIAN F. CHERIAN, MD, ALAN LAORR, MD, KHALED J. SALEH, MD, MSC, FRCSC, MICHAEL A. KUSKOWSKI, PHD, ROBERT F. BAILEY, LPN, AND EDWARD Y. CHENG, MD Investigation performed at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Quantifying the Extent of AVNFH There are numerous methods for quantifying the extent of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. However, there is no consensus regarding which method is the most reliable. The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and prognostic accuracy of “three” commonly used methods for quantifying the extent of osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

Quantifying the Extent of AVNFH The interobserver and intraobserver agreement was determined for each method The ability of each method to predict the time to subchondral collapse was analyzed statistically.

Quantifying the Extent of AVNFH Joint-preserving surgical interventions  generally more successful at earlier stages of bone involvement (before the occurrence of a subchondral fracture). The concept of quantifying femoral head involvement (important in determining prognosis) introduced by  The staging system of Steinberg et al.

Quantifying the Extent of AVNFH Subchondral fracture is the most prognostically important variable indicating progression to osteoarthritis. Subchondral fracture is the most prognostically important variable indicating progression to osteoarthritis. Several studies have demonstrated that the size of the necrotic lesion is important in determining whether a subchondral fracture will occur Several studies have demonstrated that the size of the necrotic lesion is important in determining whether a subchondral fracture will occur Size  necrotic volume or the surface area or arc of subchondral bone affected ??

Quantifying the Extent of AVNFH Methods: Thirty-nine hips in twenty-five patients who had stage-I or II osteonecrosis of the femoral head, according to the grading system of the Association Research Circulation Osseous, were independently examined on two separate occasions by three observers of different specialty backgrounds and experience. Each observer used three methods to quantify the extent of osteonecrosis of the femoral head: (1) the percentage of femoral head involvement. (2) the index of necrotic extent (3) the modified index of necrotic extent

Materaial and methods The three raters in this study : The three raters in this study : 1. a third-year radiology resident 1. a third-year radiology resident 2. an attending staff musculoskeletal radiologist 2. an attending staff musculoskeletal radiologist 3. an attending staff orthopaedic surgeon 3. an attending staff orthopaedic surgeon The observers were blinded to both their previous evaluations and the evaluations of the other observers. The observers were blinded to both their previous evaluations and the evaluations of the other observers.

The percentage of femoral head involvement first described in 1984 the abnormal signal on T1-weighted images visually estimated on the basis of serial coronal and sagittal images according to the estimated percentage of the area involved compared with the area of the entire femoral head, were grouped into three categories, as 30%.

The index of necrotic extent developed by Koo and Kim in 1995 The necrotic arc angles on the midcoronal and midsagittal images were designated A and B, respectively. The index of necrotic extent was calculated as (A/180)  (B/180)  100

The modified index of necrotic extent T he necrotic arc angle is measured on the image that demonstrates the maximal lesion size in the sagittal (A) and coronal (B) planes rather than on the midcoronal and midsagittal images. T he necrotic arc angle is measured on the image that demonstrates the maximal lesion size in the sagittal (A) and coronal (B) planes rather than on the midcoronal and midsagittal images.

Result--- Result--- Reliability and Validity The interobserver agreement as defined by intraclass correlation coefficients The interobserver agreement as defined by intraclass correlation coefficients The index of necrotic extent The index of necrotic extent  0.58 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.58 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.70 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation. The modified index of necrotic extent The modified index of necrotic extent  0.63 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.63 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.81 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation. The interobserver agreement of the percent involvement, as defined by Kendall coefficients of concordance, The interobserver agreement of the percent involvement, as defined by Kendall coefficients of concordance,  0.71 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.71 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.79 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation.

Result--- Result--- Reliability and Validity The intraobserver agreement---nearly perfect The intraobserver agreement---nearly perfect The index of necrotic extent The index of necrotic extent  0.91 (p < 0.005) for the first rater  0.91 (p < 0.005) for the first rater 0.83 (p < 0.005) for the second rater, 0.83 (p < 0.005) for the second rater, 0.93 (p < 0.005) for the third rater (p < 0.005) for the third rater. The modified index of necrotic extent The modified index of necrotic extent  0.65 (p <0.005) for the first rater  0.65 (p <0.005) for the first rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.91 (p < 0.005) for the third rater (p < 0.005) for the third rater. The percent involvement The percent involvement  0.90 (p < 0.005) for the first rater  0.90 (p < 0.005) for the first rater 0.89 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.89 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the third rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the third rater

Result--- Result--- Prognostic Ability (1) the percent involvement was significantly related to (log rank = 5.81, p < 0.05) the time to subchondral collapse

Result--- Result--- Prognostic Ability (2) index of necrotic extent (log rank = 7.17, p < 0.007)

The index of necrotic extent (A/180)  (B/180)  100 = 40 A x B = 40 x 180 x 180 / 100 = 假設 A 等於 B A 2 = A =  = degree 12960

Result--- Result--- Prognostic Ability (3) modified index of necrotic extent (log rank = 4.05, p < 0.04)

Critical Appraisal Evidence level ? Evidence level ? Reliability and Validity Reliability and Validity Reproducibility Reproducibility Limitation Limitation

Interobserver Agreement Epidemiologists consider interobserver agreement of 0.6 to 0.8 to be substantial and 0.8 to 1.0 to indicate nearly perfect agreement. Epidemiologists consider interobserver agreement of 0.6 to 0.8 to be substantial and 0.8 to 1.0 to indicate nearly perfect agreement. With the sample size used in this study (thirty- eight hips), a correlation coefficient of 0.44 could be detected as significant at the p = 0.05 level with 80% power. With the sample size used in this study (thirty- eight hips), a correlation coefficient of 0.44 could be detected as significant at the p = 0.05 level with 80% power. Kendall coefficients of concordance Kendall coefficients of concordance : for a noncontinuous categorical variable ( groups)

Reliability and Validity The interobserver agreement as defined by intraclass correlation coefficients The interobserver agreement as defined by intraclass correlation coefficients The index of necrotic extent The index of necrotic extent  0.58 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.58 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.70 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation. The modified index of necrotic extent The modified index of necrotic extent  0.63 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.63 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.81 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation. The interobserver agreement of the percent involvement, as defined by Kendall coefficients of concordance, The interobserver agreement of the percent involvement, as defined by Kendall coefficients of concordance,  0.71 (p < 0.001) for the first observation  0.71 (p < 0.001) for the first observation 0.79 (p < 0.001) for the second observation (p < 0.001) for the second observation.

Reliability and Validity The intraobserver agreement---nearly perfect The intraobserver agreement---nearly perfect The index of necrotic extent The index of necrotic extent  0.91 (p < 0.005) for the first rater  0.91 (p < 0.005) for the first rater 0.83 (p < 0.005) for the second rater, 0.83 (p < 0.005) for the second rater, 0.93 (p < 0.005) for the third rater (p < 0.005) for the third rater. The modified index of necrotic extent The modified index of necrotic extent  0.65 (p <0.005) for the first rater  0.65 (p <0.005) for the first rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.91 (p < 0.005) for the third rater (p < 0.005) for the third rater. The percent involvement The percent involvement  0.90 (p < 0.005) for the first rater  0.90 (p < 0.005) for the first rater 0.89 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.89 (p < 0.005) for the second rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the third rater 0.88 (p < 0.005) for the third rater

Limitations Only three observers Only three observers Sample size (38 hips) Sample size (38 hips) Other variables ( surgical intervention, medication, weight bearing status etc … ) Other variables ( surgical intervention, medication, weight bearing status etc … ) Configuration of the lesions

Results There was significantly valid agreement among the observers for all three methods (p < for all three). The index of necrotic extent and the percent involvement → substantial agreement among raters The modified index of necrotic extent → nearly perfect agreement Survivorship analysis revealed prognostically significant predictors of subchondral fracture. the percent involvement (p < 0.05) index of necrotic extent (p < 0.007) modified index of necrotic extent (p < 0.04)

Conclusions index of necrotic extent, modified index of necrotic extent, and estimation of the percentage of involvement of the femoral head are reproducible and reliable methods for quantitatively evaluating the extent of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Furthermore, they are clinically useful for identifying hips at greatest risk for subchondral collapse.