首页> 外文期刊>Pakistan Heart Journal >AN ASSESSMENT OF INTER-RATER RELIABILITY IN THE TREATMENT OF CAROTID ARTERY STENOSIS
【24h】

AN ASSESSMENT OF INTER-RATER RELIABILITY IN THE TREATMENT OF CAROTID ARTERY STENOSIS

机译:颈动脉狭窄治疗中的椎间盘可靠性评估

获取原文
           

摘要

Objective: To determine, through a retrospective case review, if differentsubspecialty physicians will make consistent therapeutic recommendationsfor Carotid artery stenosis.Methodology: This retrospective cross sectional study included casereview of patients with carotid stenosis presented tofrom July 2004 to March 2005 . Case reviews ofpatients were presented to seven physician-raters specializingrespectively in: Interventional cardiology (2), Vascular surgery (2),Neurology (2), or Interventional Radiology (1). Each physician reviewedcases independently and recommended a therapeutic option. Thephysicians were blinded to previous care provided. To test intra-raterreliability, two case-reviews were repeated.Result: A total of 22 cases were reviewed . About 154 responses wereobtained. Physician-raters recommended medical management 36% ofthe time, carotid artery stenting 32% of the times and carotidendarterectomy for 24% of the patients. Eight percent (8%) of the time,physicians made other recommendations, such as further diagnosticevaluation. Inter-rater agreement was 77% ( = 0.77). Intra-raterreliability was 93%( =0.93).Conclusion:?A multi-specialty team providing care for carotid arterystenosis patients can reduce “turf battles” among various specialties,resulting in better care for the patients. High Intra-rater reliability of 93%points towards a scientific evidence based approach adopted acrossvarious specialties.Key Words: Carotid Stent, Carotid Endarterectomy, Carotid Stenosis
机译:目的:通过回顾性病例审查,确定不同的专科医师是否会对颈动脉狭窄提出一致的治疗建议。方法:这项回顾性横断面研究包括对2004年7月至2005年3月期间颈动脉狭窄患者的病例回顾。分别向介入心脏病学(2),血管外科手术(2),神经病学(2)或介入放射学(1)的七个专业医师评分了患者的病例。每位医师均独立审查病例,并推荐治疗方案。医生对以前提供的护理视而不见。为了检验可评定性,重复了两次病例审查。结果:总共审查了22例。获得了大约154个响应。医师评分者建议36%的时间进行医疗管理,32%的时间进行颈动脉支架置入术,24%的患者进行颈动脉切开术。百分之八(8%)的时间,医师提出了其他建议,例如进一步的诊断评估。评分者之间的同意率为77%(= 0.77)。评分内率为93%(= 0.93)。结论:为颈动脉狭窄患者提供护理的多专业团队可以减少各个专业之间的“争夺战”,从而为患者提供更好的护理。评估者内部的高可靠性达到93%,这表明采用跨专业的科学证据为基础的方法。关键词:颈动脉支架,颈动脉内膜切除术,颈动脉狭窄

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号