Assessing the skeletal maturity of the hand-wrist Fels method. By Alex F. Roche Wm. Cameron Chumlea and David Thissen. Springfield IL Charles C. Thomas. 1988. viii + 339 pp. figures tables appendix index. $57код для вставкиСкачать
260 BOOK REVIEWS influencing the public, are good indications of the chasm that separates these two worlds. The ever present “dialectical tension” between popular racialism and the desire of some scholars to negate the bases upon which racialist claims are grounded may be better seen in this historical perspective. In dealing less with bones (other than those of the skull) and more with scholarly ideas of the relationships between bodies (“races”) and behavior, these chapters provide insights into the rich intellectual history of anthropology- In the final essay in this collection, subtitled “Shenvood Washburn and the New Physical Anthropology, 1950-1980,” Donna Haraway documents the shift that led to the modern thrust in physical anthropology. Haraway’s contribution also provides considerable uplift after the depressing data so clearly related in the two preceeding articles. Haraway’s deft recounting of these years enables us to see clearly the important recent trends in our discipline. The changes in physical anthropology noted here give us hope for our own future, both as scholars and as human beings. Although hers is not intended to summarize ASSESSINGTHE SKELETAL MATURITY OF THE HAND-WRIST: FELS METHOD. By Alex F. Roche, Wm. Cameron Chumlea, and David Thissen. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. 1988. viii + 339 pp., figures, tables, appendix, index. $57.50 (cloth). the other papers, Haraway caps this collection by providing an idea of just how far we came during those three decades. What is clear in many of these essays is the ethnocentrism of the early monogenists who, believing in the unity of Homo sapiens, saw the potential for all humans to make the cultural transformations needed to perfect their “human nature’’ (that is, to become just like their observers). The polygenists, believing in biocultural dissimilarities, more closely resemble the cultural relativists of the present in their “understanding” of cultural stability. Fortunately, Haraway’s essay reminds us that the more subtle problem of sexism had hardly been recognized. This is a volume that clearly belongs in every university library. Others like it would be welcome additions to this series. MARSHALL JOSEPH BECKER Department of Anthropology West Chester University West Chester, Pennsylvania LITERATURE CITED Morgan LH (1868)The AmericanBeaver and His Works. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott. are certainly more representative of modal US.maturational patterns than those from either the Greulich-Pyle or TW2 (Tanner et al., 1983) systems. The FELS method is based on the independent assessment of 98 maturity indicators, including both graded morphological changes and metric relationships (e.g., ratios of epiphyseal to metaphyA new text that (according to the dust seal width). These traits are coded and anajacket description) “presents an easy- lyzed by means of IBM-PC-compatible to-learn and quick-to-apply method for as- software, using a maximum likelihood apsessing skeletal maturity of the hand-wrist” proach. should be a welcome addition to the personal Herein lies a difficulty for the reviewers. and institutional libraries of those whose Because its application requires the softresearch, clinical, and/or teaching interests ware, which is not sold with the book, we include the growth and development of the could not actually apply the technique. The human skeleton. The authors advance a development of a standardized statistical truly new method of skeletal maturity as- program is reasonable and will ultimately sessment derived after more than a decade of minimize error and confusion among reresearch on nearly 700 midwestern US.sub- searchers. However, purchasers should be jects from the FELS longitudinal growth aware that prior to applying the FELS study. The FELS assessment method has method they also will need to acquire (purbeen designed to produce estimates of skele- chase price not specified) the FELShw distal maturity (and age) that are more objec- kette; and they probably will wish to invest tive than those from the Greulich-Pyle atlas in the set of 30 training radiographs as well. method (Greulich and Pyle, 1959) and that Overall, the book is excellently written 261 BOOK REVIEWS and illustrated. Chapter I, “Maturity and Its Assessment,” thoroughly, but concisely, reviews the relevant literature on the development of methods for skeletal age assessment in humans. Chapter 11, “Assessing the Maturity of the Hand-Wrist,” provides a critical review of the procedures, methods, and observations that historically have been incorporated in previous systems of assessment. Although they are clearly laying the foundation for the introduction of their new system in these chapters, the authors are to be commended for a most even-handed coverage of the work of others. These two chapters alone would make this book a worthwhile addition to the reading lists of upper-level undergraduate or graduate students as well as a review for clinicians, researchers, and university lecturers interested in the topic. In the next three chapters, the reader is introduced to information essential to understanding and applying the FELS method. In addition to describing the sample from which the system was derived and the procedures for obtaining hand-wrist radiographs, Chapter 111, “Materials and Methods,’’ amply details the five criteria (i.e., discrimination, universality, reliability, validity, and completeness) and the nine-step protocol employed to identify the specific set of 98 bone maturity indicators that ultimately characterize the system. Statistical and practical reasons for decisions regarding selection of these maturity indicators are outlined in a straightforward manner, allowing the reader a genuine appreciation for the complexity and thoroughness of the protocol. Although the next two chapters on the actual application of the FELS method display comparable clarity of text, this does not compensate for some genuine problems contained there. In Chapter IV, “Hand-Wrist Maturity Indicators,” there are few typographical errors and the line drawings of carpal juxtaposition and development are especially helpful. However, the reader would have benefited by a layout that consistently featured textual and photographic descriptions of an indicator on opposite pages (they are often back-to-back). Additional arrows on the photographs would also have helped: differentiating capping and fusion of the medial third vs. the central and lateral thirds of the epiphyseodiaphyseal junction of the radius, for example. The photographs are generally well chosen, although we have looked hard and cannot see the adductor sesamoid in the photographs said to illus- trate its ossification (Fig. 63). Chapter V, “Procedures for Applying the FELS Method,” provides detailed suggestions for improving the accuracy and replicability of the assessor. However, the section that explains the interpretation of FELS method skeletal maturity assessments is marred by editorial errors: e.g., incorrect identification of two tables essential to interpretation and an example of how to calculate the normal range of skeletal ages in which the tables cited do not yield the correct numbers. Additionally, Tables XX and XXI, which list indicators to be assessed at specific ages in males and females, respectively, are truncated at age 8 years. If not an editorial error, the reason for this is not readily deduced from the text. Similarly, the data recording form (Appendix B) does not include the age ranges for the indicators as stated (p. 59). These are minor errors, but they may generate a fair amount of confusion for the reader. In spite of these difficulties, this book almost certainly should be added to the bookshelves of researchers and clinicians already familiar with assessment and interpretation of skeletal maturity. With minor revisions, or the inclusion of an accurate errata list, it would also be extremely useful in the teaching of advanced undergraduates and graduate students. The underlying assumptions and methodology used to establish the FELS method appear to be excellent. It would surely be good if this method were to replace the Greulich-Pyle atlas in common clinical use. It seems that improving upon “unrecorded impressions [being] combined subjectively to obtain hand-wrist skeletal ages” (p. 27) was the authors’ fundamental objective. Achievement of this goal will be dependent on clinicians’ willingness to procure the diskette and train themselves in this accessible but not easy system. We await further developments with interest. SUSAN PFEIFFER MICHAEL C. MAHANEY School of Human Biology University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario, Canada LITERATURE CITED Greulich WW, and Pyle SI (1959) Radiographic Atlas of Skeletal Development of the Hand and Wrist. Stanford, C A Stanford University Press. Whitehouse RH, CamersonN, Marshall WA, TannerJM, Healy MJR, and Goldstein H (1983) Assessment of Skeletal Maturity and Prediction of Adult Height (TW2 Method).London: Academic Press.