Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining

Improper positioning is one of the factors that can lead to incorrect bone mineral density (BMD) results. This study aimed to assess the frequencies of erroneous positioning during three periods: before retraining of the technologists (BR), after retraining (AR), and at the current timepoint 8 years...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical densitometry 2018-04, Vol.21 (2), p.252-259
Hauptverfasser: Promma, Sasivimol, Sritara, Chanika, Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee, Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat, Utamakul, Chirawat, Chamroonrat, Wichana, Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn, Anongpornjossakul, Yoch, Thamnirat, Kanungnij, Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 259
container_issue 2
container_start_page 252
container_title Journal of clinical densitometry
container_volume 21
creator Promma, Sasivimol
Sritara, Chanika
Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee
Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat
Utamakul, Chirawat
Chamroonrat, Wichana
Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn
Anongpornjossakul, Yoch
Thamnirat, Kanungnij
Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong
description Improper positioning is one of the factors that can lead to incorrect bone mineral density (BMD) results. This study aimed to assess the frequencies of erroneous positioning during three periods: before retraining of the technologists (BR), after retraining (AR), and at the current timepoint 8 years after retraining (C). The BMD images of the first 150 consecutive patients who underwent DXA of the lumbar spine and hip during each of the three periods were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were excluded if they had severe scoliosis, rendering proper positioning impossible. Each BMD image was assessed by an International Society of Clinical Densitometry certified clinical densitometrist who was blinded to the date of the initial examination. For the lumbar spine in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were inclusion of both iliac crests (33.8%), straightness (30.3%), and midline positioning (20.4%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0.8%−5.6%, 2.1%−3.0%, and 0%−2.8% in the AR and C groups (p < 0.05). For the hip in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were straightness (52.8%) and internal rotation (21.8%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0%−4.2% and 8.3%−8.4% in the AR and C groups (p < 0.05). Overall improper positioning in the BR group was 49.3% and 57.3% at the lumbar spine and the hip, respectively; the respective frequencies were reduced to 9.3% and 12.7% in the AR group, and to 2.7% and 7.3% in the C group. The least significant change values for the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip also became smaller after retraining. Retraining the technologists improved patient positioning, as evidenced by the decreased frequencies of erroneous positioning and the improved least significant change values after the retraining.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jocd.2017.07.004
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1928783879</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1094695017300677</els_id><sourcerecordid>1928783879</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-477ad4338521c7c6f22022c585d6535cbec3201320f281734060828c8b814f673</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtq3DAUhkVpaW59gSyClt14eiRblhyySZNJU0hJCAl0J2z5KNFgS1PJU5hl3zwyk2RZOEKC_3LQR8gxgwUDVn9bLVbB9AsOTC4gD1QfyD4ToilAVvJjfkNTFXUjYI8cpLQC4Iwp-ZnscaWAN4rtk3_LGENM1Hl6104O_UTvQnKTC975J2pDpN-DR_rLeYztQC_RZ3VLz1PClMbZ323p5SZLv4v7NgtdCnGd8yNOcXtKl9aimWiw9AHNsw9DeHJpovdZbd2844h8su2Q8MvrfUger5YPF9fFze2PnxfnN4UpRT0VlZRtX5WlEpwZaWrLOXBuhBJ9LUphOjRlJpGP5YrJsoIaFFdGdYpVtpblIfm6613H8GeDadKjSwaHofUYNkmzhiupSiWbbOU7q4khpYhWr6Mb27jVDPSMXq_0jF7P6DXkgSqHTl77N92I_XvkjXU2nO0MmH_512HUyWTgBnsXMyLdB_e__hf7-5Tk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928783879</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Promma, Sasivimol ; Sritara, Chanika ; Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee ; Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat ; Utamakul, Chirawat ; Chamroonrat, Wichana ; Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn ; Anongpornjossakul, Yoch ; Thamnirat, Kanungnij ; Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</creator><creatorcontrib>Promma, Sasivimol ; Sritara, Chanika ; Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee ; Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat ; Utamakul, Chirawat ; Chamroonrat, Wichana ; Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn ; Anongpornjossakul, Yoch ; Thamnirat, Kanungnij ; Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</creatorcontrib><description>Improper positioning is one of the factors that can lead to incorrect bone mineral density (BMD) results. This study aimed to assess the frequencies of erroneous positioning during three periods: before retraining of the technologists (BR), after retraining (AR), and at the current timepoint 8 years after retraining (C). The BMD images of the first 150 consecutive patients who underwent DXA of the lumbar spine and hip during each of the three periods were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were excluded if they had severe scoliosis, rendering proper positioning impossible. Each BMD image was assessed by an International Society of Clinical Densitometry certified clinical densitometrist who was blinded to the date of the initial examination. For the lumbar spine in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were inclusion of both iliac crests (33.8%), straightness (30.3%), and midline positioning (20.4%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0.8%−5.6%, 2.1%−3.0%, and 0%−2.8% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). For the hip in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were straightness (52.8%) and internal rotation (21.8%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0%−4.2% and 8.3%−8.4% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). Overall improper positioning in the BR group was 49.3% and 57.3% at the lumbar spine and the hip, respectively; the respective frequencies were reduced to 9.3% and 12.7% in the AR group, and to 2.7% and 7.3% in the C group. The least significant change values for the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip also became smaller after retraining. Retraining the technologists improved patient positioning, as evidenced by the decreased frequencies of erroneous positioning and the improved least significant change values after the retraining.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1094-6950</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1559-0747</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2017.07.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28802981</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Bone mineral density ; dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry ; least significant change ; patient positioning ; precision error</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical densitometry, 2018-04, Vol.21 (2), p.252-259</ispartof><rights>2017 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-477ad4338521c7c6f22022c585d6535cbec3201320f281734060828c8b814f673</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-477ad4338521c7c6f22022c585d6535cbec3201320f281734060828c8b814f673</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2017.07.004$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28802981$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Promma, Sasivimol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sritara, Chanika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Utamakul, Chirawat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamroonrat, Wichana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anongpornjossakul, Yoch</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thamnirat, Kanungnij</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</creatorcontrib><title>Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining</title><title>Journal of clinical densitometry</title><addtitle>J Clin Densitom</addtitle><description>Improper positioning is one of the factors that can lead to incorrect bone mineral density (BMD) results. This study aimed to assess the frequencies of erroneous positioning during three periods: before retraining of the technologists (BR), after retraining (AR), and at the current timepoint 8 years after retraining (C). The BMD images of the first 150 consecutive patients who underwent DXA of the lumbar spine and hip during each of the three periods were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were excluded if they had severe scoliosis, rendering proper positioning impossible. Each BMD image was assessed by an International Society of Clinical Densitometry certified clinical densitometrist who was blinded to the date of the initial examination. For the lumbar spine in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were inclusion of both iliac crests (33.8%), straightness (30.3%), and midline positioning (20.4%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0.8%−5.6%, 2.1%−3.0%, and 0%−2.8% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). For the hip in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were straightness (52.8%) and internal rotation (21.8%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0%−4.2% and 8.3%−8.4% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). Overall improper positioning in the BR group was 49.3% and 57.3% at the lumbar spine and the hip, respectively; the respective frequencies were reduced to 9.3% and 12.7% in the AR group, and to 2.7% and 7.3% in the C group. The least significant change values for the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip also became smaller after retraining. Retraining the technologists improved patient positioning, as evidenced by the decreased frequencies of erroneous positioning and the improved least significant change values after the retraining.</description><subject>Bone mineral density</subject><subject>dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry</subject><subject>least significant change</subject><subject>patient positioning</subject><subject>precision error</subject><issn>1094-6950</issn><issn>1559-0747</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtq3DAUhkVpaW59gSyClt14eiRblhyySZNJU0hJCAl0J2z5KNFgS1PJU5hl3zwyk2RZOEKC_3LQR8gxgwUDVn9bLVbB9AsOTC4gD1QfyD4ToilAVvJjfkNTFXUjYI8cpLQC4Iwp-ZnscaWAN4rtk3_LGENM1Hl6104O_UTvQnKTC975J2pDpN-DR_rLeYztQC_RZ3VLz1PClMbZ323p5SZLv4v7NgtdCnGd8yNOcXtKl9aimWiw9AHNsw9DeHJpovdZbd2844h8su2Q8MvrfUger5YPF9fFze2PnxfnN4UpRT0VlZRtX5WlEpwZaWrLOXBuhBJ9LUphOjRlJpGP5YrJsoIaFFdGdYpVtpblIfm6613H8GeDadKjSwaHofUYNkmzhiupSiWbbOU7q4khpYhWr6Mb27jVDPSMXq_0jF7P6DXkgSqHTl77N92I_XvkjXU2nO0MmH_512HUyWTgBnsXMyLdB_e__hf7-5Tk</recordid><startdate>201804</startdate><enddate>201804</enddate><creator>Promma, Sasivimol</creator><creator>Sritara, Chanika</creator><creator>Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee</creator><creator>Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat</creator><creator>Utamakul, Chirawat</creator><creator>Chamroonrat, Wichana</creator><creator>Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn</creator><creator>Anongpornjossakul, Yoch</creator><creator>Thamnirat, Kanungnij</creator><creator>Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201804</creationdate><title>Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining</title><author>Promma, Sasivimol ; Sritara, Chanika ; Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee ; Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat ; Utamakul, Chirawat ; Chamroonrat, Wichana ; Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn ; Anongpornjossakul, Yoch ; Thamnirat, Kanungnij ; Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-477ad4338521c7c6f22022c585d6535cbec3201320f281734060828c8b814f673</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Bone mineral density</topic><topic>dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry</topic><topic>least significant change</topic><topic>patient positioning</topic><topic>precision error</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Promma, Sasivimol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sritara, Chanika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Utamakul, Chirawat</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamroonrat, Wichana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anongpornjossakul, Yoch</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thamnirat, Kanungnij</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical densitometry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Promma, Sasivimol</au><au>Sritara, Chanika</au><au>Wipuchwongsakorn, Saowanee</au><au>Chuamsaamarkkee, Krisanat</au><au>Utamakul, Chirawat</au><au>Chamroonrat, Wichana</au><au>Kositwattanarerk, Arpakorn</au><au>Anongpornjossakul, Yoch</au><au>Thamnirat, Kanungnij</au><au>Ongphiphadhanakul, Boonsong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical densitometry</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Densitom</addtitle><date>2018-04</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>259</epage><pages>252-259</pages><issn>1094-6950</issn><eissn>1559-0747</eissn><abstract>Improper positioning is one of the factors that can lead to incorrect bone mineral density (BMD) results. This study aimed to assess the frequencies of erroneous positioning during three periods: before retraining of the technologists (BR), after retraining (AR), and at the current timepoint 8 years after retraining (C). The BMD images of the first 150 consecutive patients who underwent DXA of the lumbar spine and hip during each of the three periods were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were excluded if they had severe scoliosis, rendering proper positioning impossible. Each BMD image was assessed by an International Society of Clinical Densitometry certified clinical densitometrist who was blinded to the date of the initial examination. For the lumbar spine in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were inclusion of both iliac crests (33.8%), straightness (30.3%), and midline positioning (20.4%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0.8%−5.6%, 2.1%−3.0%, and 0%−2.8% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). For the hip in the BR group, the criteria frequently not met were straightness (52.8%) and internal rotation (21.8%); the respective frequencies were significantly reduced to 0%−4.2% and 8.3%−8.4% in the AR and C groups (p &lt; 0.05). Overall improper positioning in the BR group was 49.3% and 57.3% at the lumbar spine and the hip, respectively; the respective frequencies were reduced to 9.3% and 12.7% in the AR group, and to 2.7% and 7.3% in the C group. The least significant change values for the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip also became smaller after retraining. Retraining the technologists improved patient positioning, as evidenced by the decreased frequencies of erroneous positioning and the improved least significant change values after the retraining.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>28802981</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jocd.2017.07.004</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1094-6950
ispartof Journal of clinical densitometry, 2018-04, Vol.21 (2), p.252-259
issn 1094-6950
1559-0747
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1928783879
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Bone mineral density
dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
least significant change
patient positioning
precision error
title Errors in Patient Positioning for Bone Mineral Density Assessment by Dual X-Ray Absorptiometry: Effect of Technologist Retraining
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T04%3A43%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Errors%20in%20Patient%20Positioning%20for%20Bone%20Mineral%20Density%20Assessment%20by%20Dual%20X-Ray%20Absorptiometry:%20Effect%20of%20Technologist%20Retraining&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20densitometry&rft.au=Promma,%20Sasivimol&rft.date=2018-04&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=259&rft.pages=252-259&rft.issn=1094-6950&rft.eissn=1559-0747&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jocd.2017.07.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1928783879%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928783879&rft_id=info:pmid/28802981&rft_els_id=S1094695017300677&rfr_iscdi=true