Bone age assessment: a large scale comparison of the Greulich and Pyle, and Tanner and Whitehouse (TW2) methods
Bone age assessment: a large scale comparison of the Greulich and Pyle, and Tanner and Whitehouse (TW2) methods
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/adc.81.2.172
复制
发表时间：
1999-08-01
影响因子：
5.2
通讯作者：
Hughes, IA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bull, RK;Edwards, PD;Hughes, IA
目的：比较Greulich和Parle的“图谱匹配法”和Tanner和White-house(TW2)的“计分系统”评估的骨龄。材料和方法--362张连续拍摄的左手和桡骨远端的“骨龄”片。数据采用“方法比较”统计技术进行分析。10%的X线片被重新分析以评估观察者内部的差异。结果：两种方法之间差异的95%可信区间为2.28到-1.52年。Greulich和Parle方法的观察者内差异大于TW2方法(95%置信限，-2.46~2.18，-1.41~1.43)。结论：临床实践中使用的两种骨龄评估方法不能给出相同的骨龄估计，我们建议在对单个患者进行连续测量时，只使用一种方法(最好是TW2)。
Purpose-Comparison of bone age assessed using either the "atlas matching" method of Greulich and Pyle or the "point scoring system" of Tanner and White-house (TW2).Materials and methods-362 consecutive "bone age" radiographs of the left hand and distal radius performed in a large provincial teaching hospital. Data were analysed using the "method comparison" statistical technique. Ten per cent of the radiographs were re-analysed to assess intra-observer variation.Results-The 95% confidence interval for the difference between the two methods was 2.28 to -1.52 years. Intra-observer variation was greater for the Greulich and Pyle method than for the TW2 method (95% confidence limit, -2.46 to 2.18 upsilon -1.41 to 1.43).Conclusion-The two methods of bone age assessment as used in clinical practice do not give equivalent estimates of bone age and we suggest that one method only (preferably the TW2) should be used when performing serial measurements on an individual patient.