Abstract
Purpose
This study was designed to assess the relationship between skeletal and chronological ages among current American adolescents using the Greulich and Pyle atlas for skeletal age determination.
Materials and methods
We used the Greulich and Pyle atlas to prospectively determine skeletal age in a group of 138 otherwise healthy American adolescents from 12 to 18 years of age. 62 males and 76 females were enrolled in this cohort. Paired Studentt-tests were used to statistically compare the skeletal and chronological ages in this population. Subgroup analysis examined the effect of gender on differences between chronologic age and skeletal age.
Results
For the entire cohort, mean skeletal age was significantly greater than chronological age (mean 0.80 years, P < 0.01). In 29 cases (21%) the skeletal age was at least 2 years greater than the chronologic age. Among females, such cases with marked discrepancy occurred exclusively in those chronologically between 12 and 15 years of age (P < 0.01). Males demonstrated a 2-year or greater discrepancy more commonly than females (26 vs. 17%). In males, 2-year discrepancies were equally likely across chronologic ages (P = 0.82).
Conclusions
Current American adolescents are significantly more mature by skeletal age, as determined by the Greulich and Pyle method, than their chronological age would suggest. The skeletal ages of females are most likely to markedly exceed chronologic age between the ages of 12–15 years.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Greulich W, Pyle S (1959) Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Hansman CF, Maresh MM (1961) A longitudinal study of skeletal maturation. Am J Dis Child 101:305–321
Groell R, Lindbichler F, Riepl T, Gherra L, Roposch A, Fotter R (1999) The reliability of bone age determination in central European children using the Greulich and Pyle method. Br J Radiol 72:461–464
Loder RT, Estle DT, Morrison K, Eggleston D, Fish DN, Greenfield ML, Guire KE (1993) Applicability of the Greulich and Pyle skeletal age standards to black and white children of today. Am J Dis Child 147:1329–1333
Mora S, Boechat MI, Pietka E, Huang HK, Gilsanz V (2001) Skeletal age determinations in children of European and African descent: applicability of the Greulich and Pyle standards. Pediatr Res 50:624–628
Ontell FK, Ivanovic M, Ablin DS, Barlow TW (1996) Bone age in children of diverse ethnicity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:1395–1398
van Rijn RR, Lequin MH, Robben SG, Hop WC, van Kuijk C (2001) Is the Greulich and Pyle atlas still valid for Dutch Caucasian children today? Pediatr Radiol 31:748–752
Himes JH (1984) An early hand-wrist atlas and its implications for secular change in bone age. Ann Hum Biol 11:71–75
Koc A, Karaoglanoglu M, Erdogan M, Kosecik M, Cesur Y (2001) Assessment of bone ages: is the Greulich–Pyle method sufficient for Turkish boys? Pediatr Int 43:662–665
Rikhasor RM, Qureshi AM, Rathi SL, Channa NA (1999) Skeletal maturity in Pakistani children. J Anat 195(Pt 2):305–308
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Calfee, R.P., Sutter, M., Steffen, J.A. et al. Skeletal and chronological ages in American adolescents: current findings in skeletal maturation. J Child Orthop 4, 467–470 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-010-0289-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-010-0289-z