The posterior tibial slope affects the measurement reliability regarding the radiographic parameter of the knee

Table 2 Inter-observer measurement agreements between observer 1 and observer 2

	ICC	95% CI	p-value	Kappa value
Group A (n = 58)
Hip-knee-ankle angle	0.98	0.967–0.988	< 0.001
Weight-bearing line ratio	0.958	0.927–0.976	< 0.001
Medial proximal tibial angle	0.889	0.766–0.942	< 0.001
Lateral distal femoral angle	0.963	0.858–0.985	< 0.001
Joint-line convergence angle	0.916	0.765–0.961	< 0.001
K-L grade (FLWAP radiographs)				0.589
K-L grade (PA radiographs)				0.533
Group B (n = 85)
Hip-knee-ankle angle	0.967	0.949–0.979	< 0.001
Weight-bearing line ratio	0.99	0.985–0.994	< 0.001
Medial proximal tibial angle	0.796	0.679–0.870	< 0.001
Lateral distal femoral angle	0.951	0.901–0.973	< 0.001
Joint-line convergence angle	0.859	0.780–0.909	< 0.001
K-L grade (FLWAP radiographs)				0.487
K-L grade (PA radiographs)				0.645
Group C (n = 32)
Hip-knee-ankle angle	0.991	0.949–0.997	< 0.001
Weight-bearing line ratio	0.942	0.879–0.972	< 0.001
Medial proximal tibial angle	0.79	0.569–0.898	< 0.001
Lateral distal femoral angle	0.9	0.491–0.966	< 0.001
Joint-line convergence angle	0.843	0.681–0.923	< 0.001
K-L grade (FLWAP radiographs)				0.652
K-L grade (PA radiographs)				0.619

ICC Intra-class correlation coefficients, CI Confidence interval, K-L Kellgren-Lawrence, FLWAP full-length weight-bearing anteroposterior, PA posteroanterior

ISSN: 1471-2474