4.6 Article

Comparative evaluation of three semi-quantitative radiographic grading techniques for hip osteoarthritis in terms of validity and reproducibility in 1404 radiographs: report of the OARSI-OMERACT Task Force

期刊

OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE
卷 17, 期 2, 页码 182-187

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2008.06.009

关键词

Hip; Osteoarthritis; Progression; Radiography; Validity; Reproducibility; Kellgren-Lawrence; Joint space width

资金

  1. OARSI
  2. OMERACT
  3. Pfizer
  4. Astra Zeneca
  5. Novartis
  6. Negma Lerads laboratories
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Association of Schools of Public Health [S043, S3486]
  8. National Institute of Arthritis
  9. Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Multipurpose Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Disease Center [5-P60-AR30701]
  10. Multidisciplinary Clinical Research Center [5-P60-AR49465]
  11. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MT-12919]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The objective of this work was to compare the measurement properties of three categorical X-ray scoring methods for hip osteoarthritis (CA). Methods: In data obtained from trials and cohorts, radiographs were evaluated using the Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grading system, the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) joint space narrowing score, and quantitative measurement of joint space width (JSW), analysed as a categorical variable according to Croft and Lane's cutoffs (1.5, 2.5 and 3 mm). Predictive validity was assessed through logistic regression to predict joint replacement in one database. Construct validity was assessed through logistic regression between pain and function and X-ray stages. Inter-observer and intra-observer reliability were assessed in 50 subjects by weighted kappa. Sensitivity to change was assessed in 50 patients over a 24-month interval, by standardized response mean (SRM). Results: Radiographs were available from one trial and two cohorts (1404 X-rays). All three methods predicted joint replacement in the trial. Correlation with clinical parameters was low for the three scoring methods, except for the single community-based cohort. Interrater reliability was higher for categorical JSW (kappa, 0.71 vs 0.44 and 0.47 for KL and OARSI, respectively). Intrarater reliability was similar for the three methods (0.79 vs 0.69 and 0.81). Sensitivity to change was higher for categorical JSW than KL and OARSI (SRM, 0.77 vs 0.28 and 0.35). Conclusion: Categorical JSW has similar validity and higher sensitivity to change than the other categorical scoring techniques in hip OA. These results indicate categorical JSW may be the preferred method to evaluate structural severity in hip OA clinical trials. (C) 2008 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据