Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1996 Oct;23(10):1749-55.

Assessment of joint space width in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a comparison of 4 measuring instruments

Affiliations
  • PMID: 8895153
Comparative Study

Assessment of joint space width in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a comparison of 4 measuring instruments

P Ravaud et al. J Rheumatol. 1996 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the intra and interobserver reproducibility of 4 measuring instruments for assessing joint space width in knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to estimate the effects of patients, instrument, session order, and reader variation.

Methods: We studied 30 patients with unilateral tibiofemoral OA selected to represent a broad range of radiographic changes. Joint space width (JSW) was measured on plain anteroposterior weight bearing radiographs. Using an experimental design, 3 readers assessed JSW 3 times with 4 measuring instruments (ruler, caliper, graduated magnifying glass, digitized assessment).

Results: Intra and interobserver reproducibility was high with all measuring instruments (intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.95 to 0.98 and from 0.91 to 0.97, respectively). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a patient effect (p < 10(-6)), a reader effect (p = 0.0001), an instrument effect (p = 0.0001), and a session order effect (p = 0.04). The variance component estimates were patients 55%, readers 34%, session order 2%, instruments 8%. ANOVA performed separately for each instrument showed that session order differences always represented less than 1% of the total variance. The reader component accounted for 0% of the total variance for the ruler, 2% for the digitized method, 16% for the caliper, and 18% for the graduated magnifying glass.

Conclusion: Ruler and digitized assessment have better reliability than caliper and graduated magnifying glass.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources