標準骨假體用於評估不同骨密度儀檢測之結果

Evaluation of Different Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry Densitometers Using a Standard Bone Phantom

10.6200/TCMJ.2014.11.3.06

黃敏雄(Ming-Shon Huang)；陳家寅(Chia-Yin Chen)；趙樹禮(Shu-Li Chao)；杜興洋(Hsing-Yang Tu)；陳潤秋(Ran-Chou Chen)；歐耿良(Keng-Liang Ou)；蕭文田(Wen-Tien Hsiao)

品質校正 ； 骨質密度 ； 骨含量 ； 骨測量面積 ； Quality Calibration ； Bone Density ； Bone Content ； Bone Area

北市醫學雜誌

11卷3期（2014 / 09 / 30）

54 - 61

繁體中文

目的：本研究以仿製標準化骨假體，對臨床用同廠牌不同骨密度儀，以一致化掃描模式，評估結果是否因儀器的不同而有所差異。方法：首先仿製Norland XR600 品質校正用標準腰椎骨假體為實驗假體作為對照，而後實驗儀器選擇Norland系列骨密度儀，以腰椎掃描選項執行重複15次仿製假體掃描，並以仿製假體於其它系列骨密度儀進行同參數掃描。結果：以SigmaPlot軟體分析，於One way ANOVA比較標準與仿製假體差異，結果骨質密度及骨含量Pvalue皆小於0.01，在骨測量面積P value則小於0.05；仿製假體於不同骨密度儀進行掃描，並與仿製假體於差異掃描時的平均值以Results (%True) of measurements進行比對，結果顯示出分析數據的同質性。結論：同假體所分析數據不因儀器的不同而有結果比對差異，檢查結果具可延伸使用。

Objective: This study evaluated the bone mineral density (BMD) values of a phantom in different models of bone densitometer of a particular brand, and difference estimated. Methods: The Norland series densitometers were applied to evaluate the BMD of a lumbar phantom. The Norland XR 600 was used to scan the lumbar phantom for 15 times and calibrated, and the data used as standard. The imitations were repeated under the same condition using other series of Norland. Results: The SigmaPlot v.12.5 was used to analyze collected data. Difference between standardized phantom BMD and other imitated BMD values was analyzed using one way ANOVA. The p value of bone density, bone content and bone area were less than 0.01, 0.01 and 0.05, respectively. The average of BMD values of different modalities was analyzed by Results (%True) of measurements, and homogeneity of BMD values was indicated. Conclusion: No obvious deviation was observed under different modalities, and the results of examinations may be used in relevant research.