Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Bone. 2013 Oct 18;58:160–167. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2013.10.009

Table 1.

Comparison of CTRA based EA and FE based failure load for estimation of experimental failure load

TOTAL INTACT DEFECT
EXP EA FE EXP EA FE EXP EA FE
Failure load (N) 5404 ± 2764 4870 ± 2347 5413 ± 2583 6771 ± 2498 5823 ± 2297 6255 ± 2634 4037 ± 2394 3916 ± 2081 4572 ± 2362
P-value (paired t-test) 0.06* 0.96* 0.03** 0.09** 0.74** 0.02**
Mean ± SD of Difference vs. Mechanical Testing 534 ± 1180 −9 ± 901 948 ± 1153 517 ± 850 120 ± 1108 −535 ± 615
Bland-Altman Method#, 95% CI −1779 to 2847 −1776 to 1757 −1311 to 3208 −1149 to 2183 −2052 to 2292 −1740 to 670
*

Plus-minus values are mean ± SD and data are based on 10 paired femurs.

**

Plus-minus values are mean ± SD and data are based on 10 single femurs.

#

Bland-Altman method evaluating limits of agreement between each method (QCT and FEA) versus mechanical testing based on mean difference (bias) and 95% confidence interval of difference (± 1.96 SDs).