Centroid method: Reliable method to determine the coronal curvature of scoliosis: A case control study comparing with the cobb method

Jae-Young Hong, Seung-Woo Suh, Hitesh N. Modi, Chang Yong Hur, Hae Ryong Song, Joo Hyung Ryu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Design.: Observational study with three examiners. Objective.: To compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods. Summary of Background Data.: The Cobb method is considered to be the gold standard in scoliosis measurement despite its low reliability. In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients, the centroid method can be a good method for measuring scoliosis. Methods.: Sixty whole spine postero-anterior radiographs were collected to compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods in AIS patients. Sixty radiographs were measured twice by each of the three examiners using the two measurement methods. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability. RESULT.: In comparisons of inter- and intraobserver reliability of all 60 radiographs, the inter- and intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were higher in the centroid (>0.969) than in the Cobb method (>0.832), although both were in the excellent range. The mean absolute difference (MAD) values were higher in the Cobb method (<7.15° vs. <3.75°), and >5° in five comparisons. Regarding measures of mismatched radiograms, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<9.81° vs. <3.82°), and >5° in six comparisons. And, the ICCs were higher in the centroid method (>0.972) than the Cobb method (>0.758). In immature radiograms, the ICCs were higher in the centroid (>0.973) than in the Cobb method (>0.764), even though it was in the excellent range. And, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<8.49° vs. <3.99°), and >5° in seven comparisons. Conclusion.: The centroid method is more reliable for measuring scoliosis in AIS than the Cobb method, and it can substitute the Cobb method, which showed high variability.

Original languageEnglish
JournalSpine
Volume36
Issue number13
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Scoliosis
Case-Control Studies

Keywords

  • Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
  • centroid method
  • Cobb method
  • radiographic measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Centroid method : Reliable method to determine the coronal curvature of scoliosis: A case control study comparing with the cobb method. / Hong, Jae-Young; Suh, Seung-Woo; Modi, Hitesh N.; Hur, Chang Yong; Song, Hae Ryong; Ryu, Joo Hyung.

In: Spine, Vol. 36, No. 13, 01.06.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2044d7812d4e4f44908d49dca3e27d05,
title = "Centroid method: Reliable method to determine the coronal curvature of scoliosis: A case control study comparing with the cobb method",
abstract = "Study Design.: Observational study with three examiners. Objective.: To compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods. Summary of Background Data.: The Cobb method is considered to be the gold standard in scoliosis measurement despite its low reliability. In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients, the centroid method can be a good method for measuring scoliosis. Methods.: Sixty whole spine postero-anterior radiographs were collected to compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods in AIS patients. Sixty radiographs were measured twice by each of the three examiners using the two measurement methods. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability. RESULT.: In comparisons of inter- and intraobserver reliability of all 60 radiographs, the inter- and intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were higher in the centroid (>0.969) than in the Cobb method (>0.832), although both were in the excellent range. The mean absolute difference (MAD) values were higher in the Cobb method (<7.15° vs. <3.75°), and >5° in five comparisons. Regarding measures of mismatched radiograms, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<9.81° vs. <3.82°), and >5° in six comparisons. And, the ICCs were higher in the centroid method (>0.972) than the Cobb method (>0.758). In immature radiograms, the ICCs were higher in the centroid (>0.973) than in the Cobb method (>0.764), even though it was in the excellent range. And, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<8.49° vs. <3.99°), and >5° in seven comparisons. Conclusion.: The centroid method is more reliable for measuring scoliosis in AIS than the Cobb method, and it can substitute the Cobb method, which showed high variability.",
keywords = "Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, centroid method, Cobb method, radiographic measurement",
author = "Jae-Young Hong and Seung-Woo Suh and Modi, {Hitesh N.} and Hur, {Chang Yong} and Song, {Hae Ryong} and Ryu, {Joo Hyung}",
year = "2011",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fde346",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "13",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Centroid method

T2 - Reliable method to determine the coronal curvature of scoliosis: A case control study comparing with the cobb method

AU - Hong, Jae-Young

AU - Suh, Seung-Woo

AU - Modi, Hitesh N.

AU - Hur, Chang Yong

AU - Song, Hae Ryong

AU - Ryu, Joo Hyung

PY - 2011/6/1

Y1 - 2011/6/1

N2 - Study Design.: Observational study with three examiners. Objective.: To compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods. Summary of Background Data.: The Cobb method is considered to be the gold standard in scoliosis measurement despite its low reliability. In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients, the centroid method can be a good method for measuring scoliosis. Methods.: Sixty whole spine postero-anterior radiographs were collected to compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods in AIS patients. Sixty radiographs were measured twice by each of the three examiners using the two measurement methods. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability. RESULT.: In comparisons of inter- and intraobserver reliability of all 60 radiographs, the inter- and intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were higher in the centroid (>0.969) than in the Cobb method (>0.832), although both were in the excellent range. The mean absolute difference (MAD) values were higher in the Cobb method (<7.15° vs. <3.75°), and >5° in five comparisons. Regarding measures of mismatched radiograms, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<9.81° vs. <3.82°), and >5° in six comparisons. And, the ICCs were higher in the centroid method (>0.972) than the Cobb method (>0.758). In immature radiograms, the ICCs were higher in the centroid (>0.973) than in the Cobb method (>0.764), even though it was in the excellent range. And, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<8.49° vs. <3.99°), and >5° in seven comparisons. Conclusion.: The centroid method is more reliable for measuring scoliosis in AIS than the Cobb method, and it can substitute the Cobb method, which showed high variability.

AB - Study Design.: Observational study with three examiners. Objective.: To compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods. Summary of Background Data.: The Cobb method is considered to be the gold standard in scoliosis measurement despite its low reliability. In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients, the centroid method can be a good method for measuring scoliosis. Methods.: Sixty whole spine postero-anterior radiographs were collected to compare the reliability of the Cobb and centroid methods in AIS patients. Sixty radiographs were measured twice by each of the three examiners using the two measurement methods. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability. RESULT.: In comparisons of inter- and intraobserver reliability of all 60 radiographs, the inter- and intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were higher in the centroid (>0.969) than in the Cobb method (>0.832), although both were in the excellent range. The mean absolute difference (MAD) values were higher in the Cobb method (<7.15° vs. <3.75°), and >5° in five comparisons. Regarding measures of mismatched radiograms, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<9.81° vs. <3.82°), and >5° in six comparisons. And, the ICCs were higher in the centroid method (>0.972) than the Cobb method (>0.758). In immature radiograms, the ICCs were higher in the centroid (>0.973) than in the Cobb method (>0.764), even though it was in the excellent range. And, the inter- and intraobserver MAD values were higher in the Cobb method (<8.49° vs. <3.99°), and >5° in seven comparisons. Conclusion.: The centroid method is more reliable for measuring scoliosis in AIS than the Cobb method, and it can substitute the Cobb method, which showed high variability.

KW - Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

KW - centroid method

KW - Cobb method

KW - radiographic measurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79957805870&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79957805870&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fde346

DO - 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fde346

M3 - Article

C2 - 21289563

AN - SCOPUS:79957805870

VL - 36

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - 13

ER -