Limits...
Reproducibility of dynamically represented acoustic lung images from healthy individuals.

Maher TM, Gat M, Allen D, Devaraj A, Wells AU, Geddes DM - Thorax (2007)

Bottom Line: There was no significant difference found between the six raters at any time point.Acoustic lung imaging is reproducible in healthy individuals.Graphic representation of lung images can be interpreted with a high degree of accuracy by the same and by different reviewers.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Respiratory Medicine, Interstitial Lung Disease Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, Sydney St, London SW3 6NP, UK. t.maher@ucl.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Background and aim: Acoustic lung imaging offers a unique method for visualising the lung. This study was designed to demonstrate reproducibility of acoustic lung images recorded from healthy individuals at different time points and to assess intra- and inter-rater agreement in the assessment of dynamically represented acoustic lung images.

Methods: Recordings from 29 healthy volunteers were made on three separate occasions using vibration response imaging. Reproducibility was measured using quantitative, computerised assessment of vibration energy. Dynamically represented acoustic lung images were scored by six blinded raters.

Results: Quantitative measurement of acoustic recordings was highly reproducible with an intraclass correlation score of 0.86 (very good agreement). Intraclass correlations for inter-rater agreement and reproducibility were 0.61 (good agreement) and 0.86 (very good agreement), respectively. There was no significant difference found between the six raters at any time point. Raters ranged from 88% to 95% in their ability to identically evaluate the different features of the same image presented to them blinded on two separate occasions.

Conclusion: Acoustic lung imaging is reproducible in healthy individuals. Graphic representation of lung images can be interpreted with a high degree of accuracy by the same and by different reviewers.

Show MeSH
Example of the maximum energy frame taken from three separate recordings obtained from one subject. Images demonstrate similarity in shape, relative lung size and vibration energy distribution across time.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2571960&req=5

THX-63-06-0542-f03: Example of the maximum energy frame taken from three separate recordings obtained from one subject. Images demonstrate similarity in shape, relative lung size and vibration energy distribution across time.

Mentions: A similar degree of reproducibility was found when the lungs were assessed regionally (table 3). It is noteworthy that within a recording there was a heterogeneous distribution of the averaged vibration energy in the six different zones of the lung images. This heterogeneity was found to be repeatable during subsequent recordings (fig 3). For the six lung zones, the coefficient of variance was 13% and average absolute relative error 10 (7)%. No significant differences were found between the average relative regional assessment values for the six zones of the lung between any of the three time points (p value>0.05, one way ANOVA and t test for paired data).


Reproducibility of dynamically represented acoustic lung images from healthy individuals.

Maher TM, Gat M, Allen D, Devaraj A, Wells AU, Geddes DM - Thorax (2007)

Example of the maximum energy frame taken from three separate recordings obtained from one subject. Images demonstrate similarity in shape, relative lung size and vibration energy distribution across time.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2571960&req=5

THX-63-06-0542-f03: Example of the maximum energy frame taken from three separate recordings obtained from one subject. Images demonstrate similarity in shape, relative lung size and vibration energy distribution across time.
Mentions: A similar degree of reproducibility was found when the lungs were assessed regionally (table 3). It is noteworthy that within a recording there was a heterogeneous distribution of the averaged vibration energy in the six different zones of the lung images. This heterogeneity was found to be repeatable during subsequent recordings (fig 3). For the six lung zones, the coefficient of variance was 13% and average absolute relative error 10 (7)%. No significant differences were found between the average relative regional assessment values for the six zones of the lung between any of the three time points (p value>0.05, one way ANOVA and t test for paired data).

Bottom Line: There was no significant difference found between the six raters at any time point.Acoustic lung imaging is reproducible in healthy individuals.Graphic representation of lung images can be interpreted with a high degree of accuracy by the same and by different reviewers.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Respiratory Medicine, Interstitial Lung Disease Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, Sydney St, London SW3 6NP, UK. t.maher@ucl.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Background and aim: Acoustic lung imaging offers a unique method for visualising the lung. This study was designed to demonstrate reproducibility of acoustic lung images recorded from healthy individuals at different time points and to assess intra- and inter-rater agreement in the assessment of dynamically represented acoustic lung images.

Methods: Recordings from 29 healthy volunteers were made on three separate occasions using vibration response imaging. Reproducibility was measured using quantitative, computerised assessment of vibration energy. Dynamically represented acoustic lung images were scored by six blinded raters.

Results: Quantitative measurement of acoustic recordings was highly reproducible with an intraclass correlation score of 0.86 (very good agreement). Intraclass correlations for inter-rater agreement and reproducibility were 0.61 (good agreement) and 0.86 (very good agreement), respectively. There was no significant difference found between the six raters at any time point. Raters ranged from 88% to 95% in their ability to identically evaluate the different features of the same image presented to them blinded on two separate occasions.

Conclusion: Acoustic lung imaging is reproducible in healthy individuals. Graphic representation of lung images can be interpreted with a high degree of accuracy by the same and by different reviewers.

Show MeSH