Volume 7 Supplement 1

8th International Conference on Conservative Management of Spinal Deformities and SOSORT 2011 Annual Meeting

Open Access

A comparison of authomatic vs. manual detection of anatomical landmarks during surface topography evaluation using the formtric 4D system

  • P Knott1,
  • S Mardjetko2 and
  • S Thompson2
Scoliosis20127(Suppl 1):O19

DOI: 10.1186/1748-7161-7-S1-O19

Published: 27 January 2012

Background

The Formetric 4D System (Diers International GmbH, Schlangenbad Germany) is a popular system for measuring surface topography in patients with adolescent scoliosis [14]. The system automatically detects anatomic landmarks on the patient, but then gives the user the opportunity to make adjustments to those landmarks if necessary. The purpose of this study was to see whether there would be more variability in repeated measurements if the landmarks were adjusted by the clinician or if they were left in the place where the machine had put them.

Materials and methods

Twelve patients who had adolescent scoliosis of less than 30 degrees were measured for this study. Thirty repeated measurements of each patient were performed using the Formetric 4D, and the machine was allowed to select all the anatomic landmarks without assistance from the clinician. Each output parameter was analyzed to see the amount of variability that existed in the data. Each scan was then opened in the Formetric software, and the anatomic landmarks were adjusted by the clinician to move them to the exact location that coordinated with the visible surface topography. The data was then re-evaluated to see whether the amount of variability had increased or decreased.

Results

Twelve parameters were compared, including the scoliosis angle. There were no statistically significant changes in any of the parameters before and after the landmarks were changed by the clinician.

Conclusions

The conclusion is that it was not necessary for the clinician to make adjustments to the anatomic landmarks because the outcomes are not significantly changed by these manual adjustments.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Rosalind Franklin University
(2)
Illinois Bone and Joint Institute

References

  1. Boice JD: Carcinogenesis--a synopsis of human experience with external exposure in medicine. Health Phys. 1988, 55 (4): 621-630. 10.1097/00004032-198810000-00003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Nash CL, Gregg EC, Brown RH, Pillai K: Risks of exposure to X-rays in patients undergoing long-term treatment for scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979, 61 (3): 371-374.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Oxborrow NJ: Assessing the child with scoliosis: the role of surface topography. Arch Dis Child. 2000, 83 (5): 453-455. 10.1136/adc.83.5.453.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Knott P, Mardjetko S, Nance D, Dunn M: Electromagnetic topographical technique of curve evaluation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2006, 31 (24): E911-915. 10.1097/01.brs.0000245924.82359.ab. discussion E916View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Knott et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement