摘要
目的:探讨TW3-RUS、TW3-C carpal、RUS-CHN三种骨龄评价方法的差异性及可重复性。材料与方法:应用TW3-RUS、TW3-C carpal、RUS-CHN三种方法,由2名有骨龄评价培训经历的医师,阅读时间年龄为12岁的正常男性儿童的手腕部X线平片,独立盲法进行骨龄评价。结果:2名医师的骨龄评价结果差别无统计学差异(P>0.05);3种方法对骨龄评价结果的差别有统计学意义(P<0.05);2人组内3种方法两两比较,TW3-C carpal与TW3-RUS及RUS-CHN骨龄评价结果的差别有统计学意义(P<0.05),TW3-RUS与RUS-CHN骨龄评价结果的差别无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:2名医师应用3种方法对12岁男童骨龄评价结果的可重复性高。对12岁男童骨龄评价,TW3-RUS与RUS-CHN法无明显差别,TW3-C carpal与TW3-RUS及RUS-CHN差别较大,推测TW3-C carpal可能不适合12岁男童骨龄评价。
Purpose： To investigate the difference and repeatability of assessing skeletal age by TW3-RUS, TW3-C carpal and RUS-CHN methods. Materials and Methods： Two Physicians had been trained experience of the skeletal age assessment assessed skeletal age and read the wrist X-ray of normal 12 year-old boys. They were independent to assess by TW3-RUS, TW3-C carpal and RUS-CHN and didnt know the boys age. Results： The results of the evaluation skeletal age difference between two physicians was not statistical difference. The results of the evaluation skeletal age were statistically significant difference between three methods. The difference of the results of skeletal age evaluation between TW3-RUS and RUS-CHN was without statistical significance, but that was statistical significance between TW3-C carpal and TW3-RUS, as well as TW3-C carpal and RUS-CHN. Conclusion： Two physicians used three methods to evaluate skeletal age in 12 year-old boys were high reproducibility. The difference of the evaluation skeletal age with TW3-RUS and RUS-CHN was not significant, but TW3-C carpal and TW3-RUS was significant so as TW3-C carpal and RUS-CHN. There suggest that TW3-C carpal couldnt suitable tor 12 year-old boys.
出处
《现代医用影像学》
2015年第1期35-37,共3页
Modern Medical Imageology
关键词
儿童
骨龄
手腕骨
可重复性
Chihtren Skeletal age Hand and wrist Repeatability
