Made available in DSpace on 2015-12-06T23:46:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0
Previous issue date: 2013 / A necessidade crescente de obter um instrumento que possibilite uma correta e precisa mensuracao das mamas gerou questionamentos sobre qual o melhor metodo para essa medicao. Na pratica clinica e rotineiramente utilizada a antropometria direta, porem trata-se de um metodo que sofre muitas variacoes, tanto na ferramenta de mensuracao (fita metrica, regua), quanto no tempo dispendido. Aliados a documentacao fotografica, necessita-se de instrumentos digitais que possibilitem realizar as mensuracoes de forma objetiva. Objetivo: Comparar tres softwares graficos na obtencao de medidas de mamas. Metodos: Em 40 voluntarias do genero feminino, com idades entre 18 e 60 anos, foram demarcados pontos sobre a regiao mamaria e bracos. A uniao destes pontos em cada hemicorpo formou 8 segmentos lineares e 1 angular, totalizando 80 hemicorpos avaliados, e 1 segmento mediano comum n=40. As voluntarias foram mensuradas por antropometria direta e fotografadas de maneira padronizada, e a seguir avaliadas por tres observadores, com auxilio dos softwares Image Tool®, AutoCAD 2008® e Adobe Photoshop®. Resultados: O AutoCAD® revelou ser o software com maior reprodutibilidade. O Image Tool® apresentou valores mais proximos da antropometria direta e o Photoshop® os mais distantes. Com excessao a medida do angulo, todos os outros segmentos apresentaram, em media, diferencas quando realizada a comparacao dos softwares com a antropometria direta (p<0,005). Conclusao: O AutoCAD® foi o software que apresentou melhor precisao, Image Tool® apresentou medidas mais proximas da antropometria direta, porem foi o menos preciso e Photoshop® apresentou precisao intermediaria entre os tres softwares estudados e pior acuracia / Introduction: The increasing need for tools that enable a correct
assessment for breast measurement, generated a series of questions about which the best tool to be used. In clinical practice is routinely used to direct anthropometry, but proved to be a method that undergoes many changes,
both in the tool used to measure (measuring tape, ruler), as the time spent
in this measurement. Allied to the photographic documentation, its
necessary tools that allow us to realize digital measurements in an objective
form. Objective: Compare three diferents software in measures of breasts.
Methods: In 40 female volunteers aged between 18 and 60 years were
marked points on the breast and arms. The union of these points in each
hemibody, formed 8 linear segment and 1 angular, totaling N=80
hemicorpos evaluated, and 1 common segment with n=40. The volunteers
were measures with direct antrophometry and photographed in a
standardized way. These photographs were measured for 03 different
evaluators, inter and intra evaluators with the help of software Image
Tool®, AutoCAD 2008® and Adobe Photoshop®. Results: AutoCAD®
software to be revealed with higher reproducibility. The Image Tool®
showed values closer to the direct anthropometry and the most distant was
Photoshop®. In exception, the measure of the angle, all the others segments
exhibited, on average, differences when performed to compare the software
with direct anthropometry (p<0,005). Conclusion: AutoCAD® was the
software that showed the best accuracy, Image Tool® presented measures
nearest the direct anthropometry, but was less accurate and Photoshop®
showed intermediate precision among the 3 studied software and the worst
accuracy. / BV UNIFESP: Teses e dissertações
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/22727 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Espírito Santo, Paulo Rogério Quieregatto do [UNIFESP] |
| Contributors | Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), Hochman, Bernardo [UNIFESP] |
| Publisher | Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | 113 f. |
| Source | reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP, instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo, instacron:UNIFESP |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0028 seconds