JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 27 No. 8 1362-1365
© 1986 by Society of Nuclear Medicine
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 LeBlanc, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by Jhingran, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by LeBlanc, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by Jhingran, S. G.

Precision of Dual Photon Absorptiometry Measurements

Adrian D. LeBlanc, Harlan J. Evans, Cherri Marsh, Victor Schneider, Philip C. Johnson and Satish G. Jhingran

Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine
Johnson Space Center, NASA, Houston, Texas

Correspondence: For reprints contact: Adrian LeBlanc, PhD, The Methodist Hospital, 6565 Fannin, M.S. S396, Houston, TX 77030.

ABSTRACT

One of the important uses of bone absorptiometry is to examine the rate of bone mineral change in order to evaluate therapy and to identify individuals who need therapy. Generally, this involves comparing the difference between two scans obtained months to years apart. This study investigates the precision of dual photon absorptiometry using a human torso phantom, normal subjects, and abnormal patients. These studies showed that bone mineral calculated as g/cm2 was more precise than g/cm. Reanalysis of the same scan by the same individual produced an average error equivalent to that produced by scanning and analyzing the same subject on multiple occasions. Interobserver analysis error was essentially equal to the intraobserver error. In order to obtain maximum precision, care must be taken that the integrated area of a repeat scan is identical to the previous scan. Our findings indicate that to be confident (95%) of a real change between two scans a difference of at least 5.6% must be measured.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
L. C. Shackelford, A. D. LeBlanc, T. B. Driscoll, H. J. Evans, N. J. Rianon, S. M. Smith, E. Spector, D. L. Feeback, and D. Lai
Resistance exercise as a countermeasure to disuse-induced bone loss
J Appl Physiol, July 1, 2004; 97(1): 119 - 129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 1986 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.