Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Clin Densitom ; 7(4): 413-8, 2004.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15618602

ABSTRACT

As part of a multicenter study, we examined the intersite reproducibility of bone mineral content (BMC) and areal density (BMD) among three fan-beam dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) instruments from one manufacturer, all using the same software version. Spine, femur, and body-composition phantoms were each scanned nine times at each center. Over a 3-wk period, the same 10 adults were scanned once at each of the three centers. For the spine and femur phantoms, the precision errors were 0.3-0.7%. For the body-composition phantom, the precision errors were 0.8-2.8%. The intersite coefficients of variation for the human measurements varied from 1.1 to 6.8%, depending on the bone site. We conclude that even when using the same fan-beam DXA model and software, an intersite cross-comparison using only phantoms may be inadequate. Comparisons based solely on the use of a spine phantom are insufficient to ensure compatibility of human bone mineral data at other bone sites or for the whole body.


Subject(s)
Absorptiometry, Photon/methods , Bone Density , Phantoms, Imaging , Absorptiometry, Photon/instrumentation , Absorptiometry, Photon/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Body Composition/physiology , Bone Density/physiology , Female , Femur/anatomy & histology , Femur/physiology , Femur Neck/anatomy & histology , Femur Neck/physiology , Hip Joint/anatomy & histology , Hip Joint/physiology , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae/anatomy & histology , Lumbar Vertebrae/physiology , Reproducibility of Results , Software , Spine/anatomy & histology , Spine/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL