Comparison of predictive accuracy of knee height equations in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2024 Sep;79(3):716-720
Date
07/29/2024Pubmed ID
39072793DOI
10.1002/jpn3.12336Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85199982112 (requires institutional sign-in at Scopus site) 1 CitationAbstract
Knee height can be a proxy for height when standing height cannot be reliably measured. We compared two commonly used equations (Chumlea and Rumapea) that estimate standing height from knee height. We prospectively enrolled 210 children without scoliosis or kyphosis aged 7-12 years (mean age: 10.2 years, 47.6% males) and measured their knee heights and standing heights. A two-tailed T-test was used to compare predicted heights from each of the equations to actual standing height. Chumlea equation was found to be unreliable (p = 0.0376) while Rumapea equation was found to be reliable in estimating standing height (p = 0.878). Additionally, Rumapea equation was also found to be more accurate than Chumlea equation when results were segregated based on gender and race. In conclusion, the Rumapea equation yields more accurate estimates of standing heights than the Chumlea equation in US children aged 7-12 years.
Author List
Edwards M, Feuling MB, Silverman A, Hettich K, Jacobs C, Kopesky J, Bashir A, Hessenthaler C, Martin N, Thiem D, Davis K, Noe J, Goday PSAuthors
Joshua D. Noe MD Associate Dean, Professor in the Pediatrics department at Medical College of WisconsinAlan Silverman PhD Professor in the Pediatrics department at Medical College of Wisconsin
MESH terms used to index this publication - Major topics in bold
AnthropometryBody Height
Child
Female
Humans
Knee
Male
Prospective Studies
Reproducibility of Results
