Skip to main content
Log in

Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study is to determine the intraobserver and interobserver reliability of end vertebra definition and Cobb angle measurement using printed and digital radiographs of 48 patients with scoliosis. The Cobb angle and the end vertebra were assessed by six observers in 48 patients with scoliosis using printed and digital radiographs. Definition of end vertebra and measurement of the Cobb angle was repeated three times with a 3 week interval. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to determine the interobserver and intraobserver reliabilities. 95% prediction limits for the errors in measurements are provided. For the Cobb angle a mean ICC of 0.97 was determined for intra- and interobserver reliability measurement of the printed radiographs. For the electronic radiographs a mean ICC value of 0.93 was determined for interobserver reliability and a mean ICC value of 0.96 for intraobserver reliability. Intraobserver ICC for definition of end vertebrae was 0.8 for both methods. Interobserver ICC was 0.83 for the manual and 0.74 in the digital method. One pitfall in angle measurement implies the Cobb method itself which measures in two dimensions. Until we develop a proper tri-dimensional measuring system an error is introduced. For the Cobb angle measurement the definition of end vertebrae introduces the main source of error. Digital radiography does not improve the measurement accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beekmann CE, Hall V (1979) Variability of scoliosis measurement from spinal roentgenograms. Phys Ther 59:764–765

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carman DL, Browne RH, Birch JG (1990) Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs. Intraobserver and interobser variation J Bone Joint Surg Am 72(3):328–33

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fleiss JL (1986) Reliability of measurement. In: Fleiss JL (ed) The design and analysis of clinical experiments. Wiley, Toronto, pp 1–32

    Google Scholar 

  4. Geijer H, Beckman K, Jonsson B, Andersson T, Persliden J (2001) Digital radiography of scoliosis with a scanning method: initial evaluation. Radiology 218(2):402–410

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Geijer H, Verdonck B, Beckman KW, Andersson T, Persliden J (2003) Digital radiography of scoliosis with a scanning method: radiation dose optimization. Eur Radiol 13(3):543–551 (Epub14 June 2002)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gross C, Gross M, Kuschner S (1983) Error analysis of scoliosis curvature measurement. Bull Hosp Jt Dis Orthop Inst 43(2):171–177

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lonstein JE, Carlson JM (1984) The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66(7):1061–1071

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Morrissy RT, Goldsmith GS, Hall EC, Kehl D, Cowie GH (1990) Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of intrinsic error J Bone Joint Surg Am 72(3):320–327

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Oda M, Rauh S, Gregory PB, Silverman FN, Bleck EE (1982) The significance of roentgenographic measurement in scoliosis. J Pediat Orthop 2:378–382

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sevastikoglou JA, Bergquist E (1969) Evaluation of the reliability of radiological methods for registration of scoliosis. Acta Orthop Scand 40:608–613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Shea KG, Stevens PM, Nelson M, Smith JT,Masters KS, Yandow SA (1998) Comparison of manual versus computer-assisted radiographic measurement. Intraobserver measurement variability for Cobb angles. Spine 23(5):551–555

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Weinstein SL, Ponseti IV (1983) Curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65(4):447–455

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian M. Bach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gstoettner, M., Sekyra, K., Walochnik, N. et al. Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J 16, 1587–1592 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0401-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0401-3

Keywords

Navigation