AJR Join ARRS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Youmans, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by McAlister, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Youmans, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by McAlister, W. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 171, 1415-1419, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Skeletal surveys for child abuse: comparison of interpretation using digitized images and screen-film radiographs

DC Youmans, S Don, C Hildebolt, GD Shackelford, GD Luker and WH McAlister
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. Louis Children's Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, MO 63110, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare child abuse detection using screen-film radiographs and their digitized images displayed on a computer workstation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Skeletal surveys of 20 consecutive child abuse patients whose abuse was clinically proven by a combination of history, physical and radiographic findings, and social work history, and 20 consecutive control subjects were evaluated. Three radiologists rated both the screen-film radiographs (400-speed, double-emulsion film) and their digitized images displayed on a workstation (2K x 2K resolution) using a six-point ordinal scale for suspicion of child abuse, fracture detection, and image quality. The rating response was analyzed using multiobserver-multicase receiver operating characteristic analysis of variance. The McNemar test was used to evaluate differences between imaging techniques and between diagnoses made using each imaging technique and clinically proven child abuse. RESULTS: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for screen-film radiographs was 0.934+/-0.025 and for digitized images was 0.922+/-0.013. This difference was not significant (p = .658); however, two observers significantly underestimated the child abuse diagnosis with digitized images (p = .02). In a review of the false-negative child abuse diagnoses, observers failed to recognize characteristic metaphyseal fractures (10 observations) and rib fractures (five observations) on digitized images that had been recognized on screen-film radiographs. Mean image quality was rated significantly lower (p < .0001) and interpretation time was significantly longer (75 sec; p < .001) for the digitized images than for screen-film radiographs. CONCLUSION: The characteristic types of fractures that were not identified on the digitized images, lower image quality, and longer interpretation time raise concern that digitized images may not be adequate for interpretation of suspected child abuse.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ImagingHome page
S Chapman
Non-accidental injury
Imaging, December 1, 2004; 16(2): 161 - 173.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
P. L. Kleinman, P. K. Kleinman, and J. A. Savageau
Suspected Infant Abuse: Radiographic Skeletal Survey Practices in Pediatric Health Care Facilities
Radiology, November 1, 2004; 233(2): 477 - 485.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.