Advanced

A comparison of digital morphometry and clinical measurements of ears.

Öberg, Martin LU ; Svensson, Henry LU ; Björk, Christoffer ; Flodin, Johan and Wikström, Sven-Olof LU (2013) In Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery 47(4). p.317-319
Abstract
Abstract Clinical measurements are necessary in many routine follow-ups and scientific evaluations, but the accuracy of these measurements is seldom challenged. The size of the reconstructed ear is one important parameter in the follow-up regarding patients operated on due to microtia. With the introduction of digital morphometry one was obliged to evaluate its accuracy in comparison to its analogue equivalents. In a first series of measurements the ears of 30 persons were assessed using digital morphometry, compass and ruler, and calliper to test the accuracy of these methods. In a second series of measurements, 10 patients with reconstructed unilateral microtia were assessed with digital morphometry to test the inter-individual variation... (More)
Abstract Clinical measurements are necessary in many routine follow-ups and scientific evaluations, but the accuracy of these measurements is seldom challenged. The size of the reconstructed ear is one important parameter in the follow-up regarding patients operated on due to microtia. With the introduction of digital morphometry one was obliged to evaluate its accuracy in comparison to its analogue equivalents. In a first series of measurements the ears of 30 persons were assessed using digital morphometry, compass and ruler, and calliper to test the accuracy of these methods. In a second series of measurements, 10 patients with reconstructed unilateral microtia were assessed with digital morphometry to test the inter-individual variation of this method. The accuracy of digital morphometry was of the same magnitude as the manual methods. When the inter-individual variation of accuracy was assessed in digital morphometry it was found that random error differed from person to person. In scientific settings, for instance when evaluating possible growth of the cartilage framework, the specific individual accuracy must therefore be taken into account in order to draw safe conclusions. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery
volume
47
issue
4
pages
317 - 319
publisher
Taylor & Francis
external identifiers
  • wos:000323489200017
  • pmid:23547537
  • scopus:84882750272
  • pmid:23547537
ISSN
2000-656X
DOI
10.3109/2000656X.2013.766886
language
English
LU publication?
yes
additional info
The information about affiliations in this record was updated in December 2015. The record was previously connected to the following departments: Reconstructive Surgery (013240300), Surgery Research Unit (013242220)
id
e86a23fe-bc60-4a1c-809d-48e7d4110a16 (old id 3734295)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23547537?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2016-04-01 09:53:22
date last changed
2020-01-05 03:32:42
@article{e86a23fe-bc60-4a1c-809d-48e7d4110a16,
  abstract     = {Abstract Clinical measurements are necessary in many routine follow-ups and scientific evaluations, but the accuracy of these measurements is seldom challenged. The size of the reconstructed ear is one important parameter in the follow-up regarding patients operated on due to microtia. With the introduction of digital morphometry one was obliged to evaluate its accuracy in comparison to its analogue equivalents. In a first series of measurements the ears of 30 persons were assessed using digital morphometry, compass and ruler, and calliper to test the accuracy of these methods. In a second series of measurements, 10 patients with reconstructed unilateral microtia were assessed with digital morphometry to test the inter-individual variation of this method. The accuracy of digital morphometry was of the same magnitude as the manual methods. When the inter-individual variation of accuracy was assessed in digital morphometry it was found that random error differed from person to person. In scientific settings, for instance when evaluating possible growth of the cartilage framework, the specific individual accuracy must therefore be taken into account in order to draw safe conclusions.},
  author       = {Öberg, Martin and Svensson, Henry and Björk, Christoffer and Flodin, Johan and Wikström, Sven-Olof},
  issn         = {2000-656X},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {317--319},
  publisher    = {Taylor & Francis},
  series       = {Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery},
  title        = {A comparison of digital morphometry and clinical measurements of ears.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/2000656X.2013.766886},
  doi          = {10.3109/2000656X.2013.766886},
  volume       = {47},
  year         = {2013},
}