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


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stockberger, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Kopecky, K. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stockberger, S. M., Jr
Right arrow Articles by Kopecky, K. K.

Radiology, Vol 206, 625-629, Copyright © 1998 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Objective measurement of motion in patients undergoing spiral CT examinations

SM Stockberger Jr, Y Liang, JA Hicklin, JL Wass, WT Ambrosius and KK Kopecky
Department of Radiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis 46202-5253, USA.

PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate an objective measurement of patient motion during spiral computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An acrylic rod was attached along the length of the torso in 109 patients (56 women, 53 men; age range, 21-79 years; mean age, 51 years) who underwent abdominal spiral CT examinations. Subjective evaluation of motion was graded on a five-point scale by two radiologists. Objective measurements of motion were determined by means of computer reconstruction of the rod in three dimensions and calculation of the deviation of the rod from its estimated position in the motionless state with time. RESULTS: Complete data were available in 98 patients. Subjective and objective measurements of patient motion showed a moderately high Spearman correlation coefficient of .49 (P < .001). The correlation between either observer and objective measurements was similar to the correlation between one observer and the other. CONCLUSION: This objective technique for assessing patient motion correlated well with subjective methods and may be useful in evaluating scanning parameters that may affect patient motion and hence scan quality.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1998 by the Radiological Society of North America.