Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 19, 2025

Robotized Testing of Camera Positions to Determine Ideal Configuration for Stereo 3D Visualization of Open-Heart Surgery
Published on: August 12, 2021
Applications and Error Ratios of Calibration Techniques in EOS, Orthoroentgenogram, and Teleoroentgenogram for Length
Ali Asma1, Louise Reid Nichols, Armagan C Ulusaloglu
1Nemours/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE.
Background:
Accurate length measurements of extremity bones are essential in treating limb deformities and length discrepancies in children.
Objective:
This study aimed to determine errors in common techniques used to measure lower limb lengths in children.
Methods:
Precision and instrument errors in length measurements were studied utilizing electro-optical system (EOS), orthoroentgenogram, and teleoroentgenogram The goal was to measure a 70-cm metallic rod phantom (average length of the lower extremity of a 10-year-old boy in the 50th percentile) in 3 phases. In Phase 1, the length measurements were performed in an EOS unit with internal calibrations, a magball/magstrip in various scan positions, and measurement with TraumaCAD software. In Phase 2, the measurements were repeated utilizing a single radiation "shot" teleoroentgenogram. In Phase 3, an orthoroentgenogram was utilized with a radiopaque ruler reference. The reliability and validity of measurements were calibrated by 4 physicians (a radiologist, senior orthopaedic attending, and 2 orthopaedic fellows).
Results:
EOS measurements utilizing internal references had excellent accuracy (for a 700-mm real length, magnification error (ME)] of 0.09%. Teleoroentgenogram with a magball reference and measurements performed with automatic calibration by TraumaCAD program results in ME of 1.83% with insignificant intraobserver/interobserver difference. Teleoroentgenogram with a magball or magstrip reference measured manually showed that the magball has higher intraobserver/interobserver variance than magstrip, with a 6.60 and 0.33-mm SD, respectively. The length by manual measurement utilizing the magstrip has ME of 2.21%. Orthoroentgenogram is accurate with ME of 0.26%, but does not allow anatomical analysis and is also radiation-costly.
Conclusion:
EOS and orthoroentgenogram are very accurate for length measurements. Teleoroentgenogram is less accurate in measuring length; however, addition of an external reference (magball, magstrip) placed lateral to the target improves accuracy. Automatic calibration with computer-based analysis of the external reference improves the accuracy more than manual calibration. If manual calibration is utilized, the length measurement is less accurate with the magball than the magstrip.
Level Of Evidence:
Level II-comparative in vitro study.
Related Concept Videos
Distance Corrections
Electronic Distance Measuring Instruments
Errors in Taping
Instrument Calibration
Analytical Balance Calibration
An analytical balance measures mass and requires regular calibration to...
Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors
Design Example: Measuring Distance Between Two Points with Obstructions

