• Component Description
• Eligible Sample
• Protocol and Procedure
• Quality Assurance & Quality Control
• Data Processing and Editing
• Analytic Notes
• References
• Codebook
  • SEQN - Respondent sequence number
  • DXASPNST - Spine scan status
  • DXXOSBCC - Total spine BMD invalidity code
  • DXXL1BCC - L1 BMD invalidity code
  • DXXL2BCC - L2 BMD invalidity code
  • DXXL3BCC - L3 BMD invalidity code
  • DXXL4BCC - L4 BMD invalidity code
  • DXXOSBMD - Total spine BMD
  • DXXOSBMC - Total spine BMC
  • DXXOSA - Total spine area
  • DXXL1BMD - L1 BMD
  • DXXL1BMC - L1 BMC
  • DXXL1A - L1 area
  • DXXL2BMD - L2 BMD
  • DXXL2BMC - L2 BMC
  • DXXL2A - L2 area
  • DXXL3BMD - L3 BMD
  • DXXL3BMC - L3 BMC
  • DXXL3A - L3 area
  • DXXL4BMD - L4 BMD
  • DXXL4BMC - L4 BMC
  • DXXL4A - L4 area
  • DXASPNK - Calculated K for spine
  • DXASPND0 - Calculated DO for Spine

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

2009-2010 Data Documentation, Codebook, and Frequencies

Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry - Spine (DXXSPN_F)

Data File: DXXSPN_F.xpt

First Published: November 2012

Last Revised: NA

Component Description

Users of the 2009-2010 dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry spine bone data (DXXSPN_F) are encouraged to read the documentation before accessing the data file.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely accepted method of measuring bone density due in part to its speed, ease of use, and low radiation exposure (Baran, 1997; Genant, 1996; Heymsfield, 1989; and Njeh, 1999). Beginning in 2005, DXA scans of the lumbar spine have been administered in the NHANES mobile examination center (MEC).

The spine scans provide bone measurements for the total spine and vertebrae L1 – L4. Measurements include:

• Bone mineral content (BMC) (gm) 
• Bone area (cm2) 
• Bone mineral density (BMD) (gm/cm2)

 

Eligible Sample

DXA scans were administered to eligible survey participants 8 years of age and older. Pregnant females were ineligible for the DXA examination. Participants who were excluded from the DXA examination for reasons other than pregnancy were considered to be eligible nonrespondents. Reasons for exclusion from the DXA examination were as follows:

• Pregnancy (positive urine pregnancy test and/or self-report at the time of the DXA examination).
• Self-reported history of radiographic contrast material (barium) use in past 7 days.
• Self-reported weight over 300 pounds (DXA table limitation).

Participants were excluded from the spine scan if they reported a Harrington Rod in the spine for scoliosis.

The variable DXASPNST indicates the examination status for the spine scan. The codes for DXASPNST are as follows:

DXASPNST – spine scan examination status variable
1 = Spine scan completed and total spine BMD is valid
2 = Spine scan completed, but all data are invalid
3 = Spine not scanned, pregnancy
4 = Spine not scanned, weight > 300 lbs
5 = Spine not scanned, other reason

The main reasons for completed, but invalid, spine scans were an insufficient scan area or partial scan, degenerative disease/severe scoliosis, and sclerotic spine/spinal fusion/laminectomy. The "Not scanned, other reason" code includes no time to complete the examination, pregnancy test not completed, and participant refusal, as well as exclusion for reasons other than pregnancy, such as a medical test.

 

Protocol and Procedure

The spine scans were acquired with Hologic QDR-4500A fan-beam densitometers (Hologic, Inc., Bedford, Massachusetts), using software version Discovery v12.4. The radiation exposure from DXA for the spine scan is extremely low at less than 20 uSv. All scans in the DXXSPN_F file were analyzed with Hologic APEX v3.0 software.

The DXA examinations were administered by trained and certified radiology technologists. Further details of the DXA examination protocol are documented in the Body Composition Procedures Manual located on the NHANES website: (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm).

 

Quality Assurance & Quality Control

A high level of quality control was maintained throughout the DXA data collection and scan analysis, including a rigorous phantom scanning schedule.

Monitoring of Field Staff and Densitometers
Staff from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and the NHANES data collection contractor monitored technologist acquisition performance through in-person observations in the field. Retraining sessions were conducted with the technologists annually and as needed to reinforce correct techniques and appropriate protocol. In addition, technologist performance codes were recorded by the NHANES quality control center at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), Department of Radiology during review of participant scans. The codes documented when the technologist had deviated from acquisition procedures and where scan quality could have been improved. The performance codes were tracked for each technologist individually and a summary was reported to NCHS on a quarterly basis. Additional feedback on technologist performance was provided by the UCSF when problems were noted during review of the scans. Ongoing communication was maintained throughout the year among the UCSF, the NCHS, and the data collection contractor regarding any issues that arose.

Hologic service engineers performed all routine densitometer maintenance and repairs. Copies of all reports completed by the manufacturer’s service engineers were sent to the UCSF when the scanners were serviced or repaired so any changes in measurement as a result of the work could be assessed. No mechanical repairs were required for any of the three densitometers in 2009-10.

Scan Analysis
Each participant scan and phantom scan was reviewed and analyzed by the UCSF using standard radiologic techniques and study-specific protocols developed for the NHANES. The most recently released Hologic software, APEX v3.0 (Hologic), which has been shown to have increased precision (Fan, 2008), was used to analyze all spine scans acquired in 2009-10. Expert review was conducted by the UCSF on 100% of analyzed participant scans to verify the accuracy and consistency of the results.

Invalidity Codes
Invalidity codes were applied by the UCSF to indicate the reasons spine regions of interest (ROI) could not be analyzed accurately. The invalidity codes are provided in the data file (see Data Processing and Editing section for a more detailed description of the invalidity codes).

Quality Control Scans
The quality control phantoms were scanned according to a predetermined schedule. The Hologic Anthropomorphic Spine Phantom that traveled with each MEC was scanned daily as required by the manufacturer to ensure accurate calibration of the densitometer. The Hologic Femur Phantom was scanned once each week. A Hologic Spine (HSP-Q96) Phantom and a Hologic Block Phantom circulated among the MECs and were scanned at the start of operations at each survey site.

The complete phantom scanning schedule is described in the Body Composition Procedures Manual located on the NHANES website.

In 2009-2010, longitudinal monitoring was conducted through daily spine phantom scans as required by the manufacturer and through the once weekly femur phantom scans in order to correct any scanner-related changes in participant data. The circulating HSP-Q96 and block phantoms, which were scanned at the start of operations at each site, provided additional data for use in longitudinal monitoring and cross calibration.

The UCSF used the Cumulative Statistics method (CUSUM) and the MEC-specific phantom data to determine breaks in the calibration of the densitometers over the course of the survey (Lu, 1996). No shifting or drifting of the MEC-specific spine phantom values was found for any of the three MECs during 2009-2010. Therefore no corrections to the participant data were needed. Comparison of data for the phantoms that circulated among the MECs indicated no statistically significant differences so that data from the three MECs could be combined.

A number of data quality issues were addressed through the quality control program. Direct feedback given to the technologists regarding acquisition problems affecting the quality of the scans and yearly refresher training resulted in improved technologist performance. The rigorous schedule of quality control scans provided continuous monitoring of machine performance. The expert review procedures helped to ensure that scan analysis was accurate and consistent.

 

Data Processing and Editing

During the editing process, data were reviewed for completeness, consistency, and outliers. Back-end edits of the data were performed when errors were identified.

Invalidity Codes
Invalidity codes were included in the data file to indicate the reasons and spine regions of interest (ROI) could not be analyzed accurately. Invalidity codes were applicable to completed scans only (DXASPNST = 1 or 2). If a participant was not scanned, all invalidity codes are missing.

The invalidity codes are provided in the data file as follows:

Invalidity codes
DXXOSBCC = total spine BMD
DXXL1BCC = L1 vertebra BMD
DXXL2BCC = L2 vertebra BMD
DXXL3BCC = L3 vertebra BMD
DXXL4BCC = L4 vertebra BMD

Values for DXXL1BCC, DXXL2BCC, DXXL3BCC, DXXL4BCC
0 = Valid data
1 = Objects not removed
2 = Non-removable objects such as implants
3 = Excessive x-ray “noise” due to obesity
4 = Insufficient scan area
5 = Movement
6 = (degenerative diseases, spinal fusion, fractures)

Values for DXXOSBCC
0 = valid data
1 = invalid data

If one or more spine vertebrae were coded as invalid, total spine BMD was coded as invalid (DXXOSBCC = 1) and all spine data were set to missing.

 

Analytic Notes

The NHANES examination sample weights should be used for any analyses using the DXXSPN_F data. Please refer to the NHANES Analytic Guidelines and the on-line NHANES Tutorial for further details on the use of sample weights and other analytic issues. Both of these are available on the NHANES website. (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm)

 

References

• Baran DT, Faulkner KG, Genant HK, Miller PD, Pacifici R. Diagnosis and management of osteoporosis: guidelines for the utilization of bone densitometry.Calcif Tissue Int 1997:62:433-440.
• Fan B, Lewiecki EM, Sherman M, Lu Y, Miller PD, Genant HK, Shepherd JA. Improved precision with Hologic Apex software. Osteoporos Int. 2008;19:1597-602.
• Genant HK, Engelke K, Fuerst T, Güer C-C, Grampp S, Harris ST, Jergas M, Lang T, Lu Y, Majumdar S, Mathur A, Takada M. Noninvasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: state of the art. J Bone Miner Res 1996;11:707-30.
• Heymsfield SB, Wang J, Heshka S, Kehayias JJ, Pierson RN Jr. Dual-photon absorptiometry: comparison of bone mineral and soft tissue measurements in vivo with established methods. Am J Clin Nutr 1989;49:1283-9.
• Hologic Product Support: Discovery. http://www.hologic.com
• ISCD Official Positions 2007. October 2007. http://www.iscd.org/Visitors/positions/OfficialPositionsText.cfm
• Lu Y, Mathur AK, Blunt BA, et al. Dual X-ray absorptiometry quality control: comparison of visual examination and process-control charts. JBMR 1996;11:626-37.
• Njeh CF, Fuerst T, Hans D, Blake GM, Genant HK. Radiation exposure in bone mineral density assessment. Appl Radiat Isot 1999;50:215-36.

Codebook and Frequencies