Reliability and Validity of Scoliosis Measurements Obtained with Surface Topography Techniques: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background. Surface topography (ST) is one of the methods in scoliosis assessment. This study aimed to systematically review the reliability and validity of the ST measurements for assessing scoliosis. Methods. A literature search of four databases was performed and is reported following PRISMA guidelines. The methodological quality was evaluated using Brink and Louw appraisal tool and data extraction was performed. The results were analyzed and synthesized qualitatively using the level of evidence method. Results. Eighteen studies were included and analyzed. Four were evaluated for reliability, six for validity, and eight for reliability and validity. The methodological quality of fourteen studies was high. Good to excellent intra-investigator reliability was shown on asymmetry, sagittal, horizontal, and most frontal ST measurements (evidence level: strong). Asymmetry and most frontal, sagittal, horizontal ST measurements showed good to excellent inter-investigator reliability (evidence level: moderate). When comparing corresponding ST and radiological measurements, good to strong validity was shown on most frontal, sagittal, and asymmetry measurements (evidence level: strong). Formetric measurements had good intra-investigator reliability and validity (evidence level: strong). Conclusions. Most asymmetry, sagittal, and frontal ST measurements showed satisfactory reliability and validity. Horizontal ST measurements showed good reliability and poor validity. The ST technique may have great potential in assessing scoliosis, especially in reducing radiation exposure and performing cosmetic assessments.

Three-Dimensional Spinal Evaluation Using Rasterstereography in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Is It Closer to Three-Dimensional or Two-Dimensional Radiography?

“…These values are near the 5 • margin of error of Cobb angle measurement performed on radiography [36][37][38], with almost 50% of curves with more than 5 • of difference between rasterstereography and 2D radiography. These results confirmed what the existing literature reported in a recent systematic review [31], with a good to strong correlation (r > 0.60) between rasterstereography and 2D radiography. The mean difference values are also in line with the reported mean difference in the existing literature, ranging from 5.4 • to 8.8 • [27,35].…”

“…Among several commercial systems, the Formetric-4D system (Diers International GmbH, Schlangenbad, Germany) has been validated against 2D radiography by a collaborative study between the Diers company and German universities [23]. This system is largely used in research to measure and control spine deformities in AIS patients [26][27][28][29][30][31]. Most of the previous studies evaluating the validity of this system [31] concluded a good to strong correlation (r > 0.60) compared with 2D radiographs.…”

“…This system is largely used in research to measure and control spine deformities in AIS patients [26][27][28][29][30][31]. Most of the previous studies evaluating the validity of this system [31] concluded a good to strong correlation (r > 0.60) compared with 2D radiographs. To the best of our knowledge, its accuracy compared to 3D radiography has not been studied.…”

Initial study on an expert system for spine diseases screening using inertial measurement unit

“…This allows various kinematic patterns to be assessed in three dimensions 17 . It can also be considered a valuable screening tool as it is non-invasive, not harmful, so the examinations can be repeated numerous times 15 , 17 , 19 .…”

“…It is important to mention that the use of ST technology does not expose the patient to harmful radiation, unlike X-Ray 15,17,18 . In various spine diseases -repeated exposure to X-Ray may be harmful for patients 15,[17][18][19][20] .…”