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
. 1998 May;27(5):271-7.
doi: 10.1007/s002560050380.

Skeletal age assessment in children and young adults: comparison between a newly developed sonographic method and conventional methods

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Skeletal age assessment in children and young adults: comparison between a newly developed sonographic method and conventional methods

A Castriota-Scanderbeg et al. Skeletal Radiol. 1998 May.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the performance of a new sonographic (US) method of bone age estimation with other methods currently in use.

Design and patients: One hundred and fifteen subjects underwent left hand/wrist radiography and US examination of the hip for bone age assessment. For each patient, measurements of skeletal age were available based on Greulich-Pyle and Tanner and Whitehouse, the latter being presented in three subtypes (RUS, carpals, and B20) in addition to the US values. To assess agreement between methods, each method was compared with every other method. Differences between calculated skeletal age and chronological age were assessed, and the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of each method computed.

Results: Coupled B20/RUS values showed the best agreement, with 95% of observations within 2.45 years of each other, followed by carpals/B20, B20/GP, and GP/RUS. The US method agreed the least (difference of 4.19-5.13 years) with the other methods. The US method provided 85.8% (US vs RUS) to 91.3% (US vs GP) concordant results in recognizing differences between skeletal and chronological age, and showed a 72.5% sensitivity and a 56.8% specificity.

Conclusion: Although the US method promises to permit a safe and cost-effective assessment of skeletal age, its low accuracy makes it currently unsuitable for clinical use.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources