Quality-Control Procedures for Densitometry

  • Sydney Lou Bonnick
Part of the Current Clinical Practice book series (CCP)


The original indications for bone-mass measurements from the National Osteoporosis Foundation, published in 1988, and the guidelines for the clinical applications for bone densitometry from the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, published in 1996, called for strict quality control procedures at clinical sites performing densitometry (1,2). Such procedures are crucial to the generation of accurate and precise bone-density data. In spite of inherently superb accuracy and precision in today’ s X-ray densitometers, alterations in the functioning of the machines will occur. Quality control procedures to detect these alterations in machine function should be utilized by every clinical site performing densitometry, regardless of the frequency with which measurements are performed.


Control Chart Control Limit Bone Densitometry Quality Control Procedure Standard Deviation Unit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Johnston CC, Melton LJ, Lindsay R, Eddy DM (1989) Clinical indications for bone mass measurements: a report from the scientific advisory board of the National Osteoporosis Foundation. J Bone Miner Res 4: S1 — S28.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miller PD, Bonnick SL, Rosen CJ (1996) Consensus of an international panel on the clinical utility of bone mass measurements in the detection of low bone mass in the adult population. Calcif Tissue Int 58: 207–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Westgard JO, Barry PL, Hunt MR, Groth T (1981) A multirule Shewhart chart for quality control in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem 27: 493–501.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Montgomery DC (1992)Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Orwoll ES, Oviatt SK, Biddle JA (1993) Precision of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: development of quality control rules and their application in longitudinal studies. J Bone Miner Res 8: 693–699.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lu Y, Mathur AK, Blunt BA, Gluer CC, Will AS, Fuerst TP, et al. (1998) Dual X-ray absorptiometry quality control: comparison of visual examination and process-control charts. J Bone Miner Res 11:626–637.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Orwoll ES, Oviatt SK, and the Nafarelin Bone Study Group (1991) Longitudinal precision of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in a multicenter trial. J Bone Miner Res 6: 191–197.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    British Standards Institution (1980) BS5703: Guide to data analysis and quality control using Cusum techniques. London.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pearson D, Cawte SA (1997) Long-term quality control of DXA: a comparison of Shewhart rules and CUSUM charts. Osteoporosis Int 7:338–343.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Norland Medical Systems (1993) XR-Series X-Ray Bone Densitometer Operator’s Guide. Ft. Atkinson, WI.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norland Medical Systems (1996) Model pDEXA Forearm X-ray Bone Densitometer Operator’s Guide. Ft. Atkinson, WI.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hologic QDR 4500X-Ray Bone Densitometer User’s Guide,Revision C. Waltham, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sydney Lou Bonnick
    • 1
  1. 1.Texas Woman’s UniversityDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations