Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the updated version of this software in patients with various spinal deformity.
METHODS: Sixty patients were included in this study and were divided into three categories: 20 patients with AIS, 20 patients with ASD, and 20 patients having undergone corrective surgery for spinal deformity. The measurements were performed by two senior and two junior orthopedic surgery residents, and were done at two points in time separated by a 3-week interval with the cases being randomized every time to reduce the risk of memory bias. Measured parameters included coronal, sagittal, global alignment parameters, and pelvic parameters.
RESULTS: When assessing the inter- and intra-observer reliability across all the groups of patients, none of the coefficients was smaller than 0.8 with a very high level of agreement. The standard error ranged from 0.7° to 1.5° demonstrating a high level of accuracy. Fairly similar results were seen when the groups were divided into the three categories except for the post-operative groups where a strong and not perfect level of agreement was reported.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess the reproducibility of the new version of KEOPS, showing a very high agreement in all measurements. In the post-operative group, although it showed a strong agreement, the lower performance can be explained by the presence of surgical material making it harder to identify the anatomical landmarks accurately. Nevertheless, we can recommend the usage of this software in a clinical setting.
METHODS: Sixty patients were included in this study and were divided into three categories: 20 patients with AIS, 20 patients with ASD, and 20 patients having undergone corrective surgery for spinal deformity. The measurements were performed by two senior and two junior orthopedic surgery residents, and were done at two points in time separated by a 3-week interval with the cases being randomized every time to reduce the risk of memory bias. Measured parameters included coronal, sagittal, global alignment parameters, and pelvic parameters.
RESULTS: When assessing the inter- and intra-observer reliability across all the groups of patients, none of the coefficients was smaller than 0.8 with a very high level of agreement. The standard error ranged from 0.7° to 1.5° demonstrating a high level of accuracy. Fairly similar results were seen when the groups were divided into the three categories except for the post-operative groups where a strong and not perfect level of agreement was reported.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess the reproducibility of the new version of KEOPS, showing a very high agreement in all measurements. In the post-operative group, although it showed a strong agreement, the lower performance can be explained by the presence of surgical material making it harder to identify the anatomical landmarks accurately. Nevertheless, we can recommend the usage of this software in a clinical setting.
摘要：
背景：研究的目的是评估该软件在各种脊柱畸形患者中的更新版本。
方法：本研究纳入60例患者，分为三类：20例AIS患者，20名ASD患者，20例脊柱畸形矫正手术患者。测量是由两名高级和两名初级骨科住院医师进行的，并且在间隔3周的两个时间点进行，每次将病例随机分组以降低记忆偏倚的风险。测量参数包括日冕，矢状,全局对齐参数，和骨盆参数。
结果：在评估所有患者组的观察者间和观察者内的可靠性时，没有一个系数小于0.8，具有很高的一致性。标准误差在0.7°至1.5°的范围内,表明了高水平的准确度。当将这些组分为三类时，可以看到相当相似的结果，除了手术后的组，其中报告了强烈而不完美的协议水平。
结论：这是第一项评估新版KEOPS可重复性的研究，在所有测量中显示出非常高的一致性。在术后组,尽管它显示了强烈的协议，较低的性能可以解释为手术材料的存在，使其更难准确地识别解剖标志。然而，我们可以推荐在临床环境中使用此软件。
方法：本研究纳入60例患者，分为三类：20例AIS患者，20名ASD患者，20例脊柱畸形矫正手术患者。测量是由两名高级和两名初级骨科住院医师进行的，并且在间隔3周的两个时间点进行，每次将病例随机分组以降低记忆偏倚的风险。测量参数包括日冕，矢状,全局对齐参数，和骨盆参数。
结果：在评估所有患者组的观察者间和观察者内的可靠性时，没有一个系数小于0.8，具有很高的一致性。标准误差在0.7°至1.5°的范围内,表明了高水平的准确度。当将这些组分为三类时，可以看到相当相似的结果，除了手术后的组，其中报告了强烈而不完美的协议水平。
结论：这是第一项评估新版KEOPS可重复性的研究，在所有测量中显示出非常高的一致性。在术后组,尽管它显示了强烈的协议，较低的性能可以解释为手术材料的存在，使其更难准确地识别解剖标志。然而，我们可以推荐在临床环境中使用此软件。
