scholarly journals The Reliability and Validity of the Thoraco-Lumbar Injury Classification and Severity score

QJM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I H Sabry ◽  
A F Toubar ◽  
O A Ahmed ◽  
M I Alashwal
Keyword(s):  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Treatment Recommendations ◽  
Treatment Recommendation ◽  
Spearman Correlation ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Correct Treatment ◽  
Posterior Ligamentous Complex ◽  
Neurologic Status ◽  
Injury Classification

Abstract Background The TLICS/TLISS is a recently introduced classification system for thoracolumbar spinal column injures designed to simplify injury classification and facilitate treatment decision making. Before being widely adopted, the reliability and validity of the TLICS/TLISS must be studied. Aim of the Work To determine the interrater and intrarater reliability and the validity of the TLICS score and its predecessor the TLISS scoring system in the clinical practice. Patients and Methods A total of 7 articles with 10 datasets were used to test the inter- and intrarater reliability and validity of the TLICS/TLISS score for thoracolumbar spine trauma. Included studies presented Thoracolumbar trauma cases’ details (including clinical data, plain radiographs, CT scans and MRI) to spine surgeons allowing them to score them using the TLICS/TLISS score in each of its components (neurologic status, PLC integrity and fracture morphology/mechanism), the final score and surgeons’ agreement with the scores treatment recommendations; as well as comparing the treatment recommendations (surgical vs non-surgical management) with the treatment the patients actually received. At a later time the surgeons were assigned the task with the cases reordered. The interrater reliability, as well as the intrarater reliability of the score for each component and sum, were evaluated by Cohen’s unweighted k-value and Spearman’s rank order correlation. In addition, the sensitivity and specificity of the score (validity) were evaluated by the percent of correct treatment recommendations according to the sum of the TLICS/TLISS and the treatment actually received by the patients. Results Interrater reliability assessed by generalized kappa coefficients was 0.45 ±0.17 for injury morphology/mechanism, 0.91 ±0.03 for neurologic status, 0.42 ±0.13 for posterior ligamentous complex status, 0.36 ±0.14 for TLICS/TLISS total, and 0.59 ±0.10 for treatment recommendation. Respective results using the Spearman correlation were 0.52 ±0.18, 0.95 ±0.05, 0.57 ±0.13, 0.75 ±0.10, and 0.64 ±0.20. Intrarater kappa coefficients were 0.53 ±0.14 for injury morphology/mechanism, 0.89 ±0.07 for neurologic status, 0.53 ±0.15 for posterior ligamentous complex status, 0.46 ±0.16 for TLICS/TLISS total, and 0.61 ±0.02 for treatment recommendation. Respective results using the Spearman correlation were 0.63 ±0.08, 0.90 ±0.03, 0.64 ±0.10, 0.77 ±0.03, and 0.60 ±0.02. The percent of correct treatment recommendation by the score and the treatment actually received by the patients was 94.4% ±1.5, with sensitivity of 0.91 ±0.06, specificity of 0.94 ±0.01, PPV of 0.94 ±0.01, NPV of 0.93 ±0.02. Conclusions The TLICS/TLISS score has good reliability and validity and it compares favorably to other contemporary and old thoracolumbar fracture classification systems.

scholarly journals Measurement of Scapular Asymmetry and Assessment of Shoulder Dysfunction Using the Lateral Scapular Slide Test: A Reliability and Validity Study

2001 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 799-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corrie J Odom ◽  
Andrea B Taylor ◽  
Christine E Hurd ◽  
Craig R Denegar
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Distance Measures ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Shoulder Dysfunction ◽  
Difference Measurement ◽  
Slide Test ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Background and Purpose. The Lateral Scapular Slide Test (LSST) is used to determine scapular position with the arm abducted 0, 45, and 90 degrees in the coronal plane. Assessment of scapular position is based on the derived difference measurement of bilateral scapular distances. The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of measurements obtained using the LSST and whether they could be used to identify people with and without shoulder impairments. Subjects. Forty-six subjects ranging in age from 18 to 65 years (X̄=30.0, SD=11.1) participated in this study. One group consisted of 20 subjects being treated for shoulder impairments, and one group consisted of 26 subjects without shoulder impairments. Methods. Two measurements in each test position were obtained bilaterally. From the bilateral measurements, we derived the difference measurement. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [1,1]) and the standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated for intrarater and interrater reliability of the difference in side-to-side measures of scapular distance. Sensitivity and specificity of the LSST for classifying subjects with and without shoulder impairments were also determined. Results. The ICCs for intrarater reliability were .75, .77, and .80 and .52, .66, and .62, respectively, for subjects without and with shoulder impairments in 0, 45, and 90 degrees of abduction. The ICCs for interrater reliability were .67, .43, and .74 and .79, .45, and .57, respectively, for subjects without and with shoulder impairments in 0, 45 and 90 degrees of abduction. The SEMs ranged from 0.57 to 0.86 cm for intrarater reliability and from 0.79 to 1.20 cm for interrater reliability. Using the criterion of greater than 1.0 cm difference, sensitivity and specificity were 35% and 48%, 41% and 54%, and 43% and 56%, respectively, for 0, 45, and 90 degrees of abduction. Sensitivity and specificity based on the criterion of greater than 1.5 cm difference were 28% and 53%, 50% and 58%, and 34% and 52%, respectively, for the 3 scapular positions. Conclusion and Discussion. Our results suggest that measurements of scapular positioning based on the difference in side-to-side scapular distance measures are not reliable. Furthermore, the results suggest that sensitivity and specificity of the LSST measurements are poor and that the LSST should not be used to identify people with and without shoulder dysfunction.

scholarly journals Functional Index-3: A Valid and Reliable Functional Outcome Assessment Measure in Patients With Dermatomyositis and Polymyositis

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Floranne C. Ernste ◽  
Christopher Chong ◽  
Cynthia S. Crowson ◽  
Tanaz A. Kermani ◽  
Orla Ni Mhuircheartaigh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Muscle Endurance ◽  
Spearman Correlation ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Functional Index

Objective.Patients with dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM) have reduced muscle endurance.The aim of this study was to streamline the Functional Index-2 (FI-2) by developing the Functional Index-3 (FI-3) and to evaluate its measurement properties, content and construct validity, and intra- and interrater reliability.Methods.A dataset of the previously performed and validated FI-2 (n = 63) was analyzed for internal redundancy, floor, and ceiling effects. The content of the FI-2 was revised into the FI-3. Construct validity and intrarater reliability of FI-3 were tested on 43 DM and PM patients at 2 rheumatology centers. Interrater reliability was tested in 25 patients. The construct validity was compared with the Myositis Activities Profile (MAP), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and Borg CR-10 using Spearman correlation coefficient.Results.Spearman correlation coefficients of 63 patients performing FI-3 revealed moderate to high correlations between shoulder flexion and hip flexion tasks and similar correlations with MAP and HAQ scores; there were lower correlations for neck flexion task. All FI-3 tasks had very low to moderate correlations with the Borg scale. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of FI-3 tasks for intrarater reliability (n = 25) were moderate to good (0.88–0.98). ICC of FI-3 tasks for interrater reliability (n = 17) were fair to good (range 0.83–0.96).Conclusion.The FI-3 is an efficient and valid method for clinically assessing muscle endurance in DM and PM patients. FI-3 construct validity is supported by the significant correlations between functional tasks and the MAP, HAQ, and Borg CR-10 scores.

Intrarater and interrater reliability and validity in the assessment of the mechanism of injury and integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex: a novel injury severity scoring system for thoracolumbar injuries

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
James S. Harrop ◽  
Alexander R. Vaccaro ◽  
R. John Hurlbert ◽  
Jared T. Wilsey ◽  
Eli M. Baron ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Classification System ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Treatment Algorithm ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Treatment Recommendations ◽  
Injury Mechanism ◽  
Mechanism Of Injury ◽  
Case Histories ◽  
Posterior Ligamentous Complex ◽  
Thoracolumbar Injury

ObjectA new classification and treatment algorithm for thoracolumbar injuries was recently introduced by Vaccaro and colleagues in 2005. A thoracolumbar injury severity scale (TLISS) was proposed for grading and guiding treatment for these injuries. The scale is based on the following: 1) the mechanism of injury; 2) the integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex (PLC); and 3) the patient’s neurological status. The reliability and validity of assessing injury mechanism and the integrity of the PLC was assessed.MethodsForty-eight spine surgeons, consisting of neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons, reviewed 56 clinical thoracolumbar injury case histories. Each was classified and scored to determine treatment recommendations according to a novel classification system. After 3 months the case histories were reordered and the physicians repeated the exercise. Validity of this classification was good among reviewers; the vast majority (> 90%) agreed with the system’s treatment recommendations. Surgeons were unclear as to a cogent description of PLC disruption and fracture mechanism.ConclusionsThe TLISS demonstrated acceptable reliability in terms of intra- and interobserver agreement on the algorithm’s treatment recommendations. Replacing injury mechanism with a description of injury morphology and better definition of PLC injury will improve inter- and intraobserver reliability of this injury classification system.

scholarly journals Education, Implementation, and Teams: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (16_suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Greif ◽  
Farhan Bhanji ◽  
Blair L. Bigham ◽  
Janet Bray ◽  
Jan Breckwoldt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ◽  
Performance Feedback ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Treatment Recommendations ◽  
Treatment Recommendation ◽  
Opioid Overdose ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Cardiovascular Care

For this 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations , the Education, Implementation, and Teams Task Force applied the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, study design, time frame format and performed 15 systematic reviews, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance. Furthermore, 4 scoping reviews and 7 evidence updates assessed any new evidence to determine if a change in any existing treatment recommendation was required. The topics covered included training for the treatment of opioid overdose; basic life support, including automated external defibrillator training; measuring implementation and performance in communities, and cardiac arrest centers; advanced life support training, including team and leadership training and rapid response teams; measuring cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, feedback devices, and debriefing; and the use of social media to improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation application.

Development and Initial Validation of a Project-Based Rubric to Assess the Systems-Based Practice Competency of Residents in the Clinical Chemistry Rotation of a Pathology Residency

2014 ◽  
Vol 138 (6) ◽  
pp. 809-813
Author(s):  
Carolyn R. Vitek ◽  
Jane C. Dale ◽  
Henry A. Homburger ◽  
Sandra C. Bryant ◽  
Amy K. Saenger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Project Evaluation ◽  
Critical Thinking Skills

Context.— Systems-based practice (SBP) is 1 of 6 core competencies required in all resident training programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Reliable methods of assessing resident competency in SBP have not been described in the medical literature. Objective.— To develop and validate an analytic grading rubric to assess pathology residents' analyses of SBP problems in clinical chemistry. Design.— Residents were assigned an SBP project based upon unmet clinical needs in the clinical chemistry laboratories. Using an iterative method, we created an analytic grading rubric based on critical thinking principles. Four faculty raters used the SBP project evaluation rubric to independently grade 11 residents' projects during their clinical chemistry rotations. Interrater reliability and Cronbach α were calculated to determine the reliability and validity of the rubric. Project mean scores and range were also assessed to determine whether the rubric differentiated resident critical thinking skills related to the SBP projects. Results.— Overall project scores ranged from 6.56 to 16.50 out of a possible 20 points. Cronbach α ranged from 0.91 to 0.96, indicating that the 4 rubric categories were internally consistent without significant overlap. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.63 to 0.81, indicating moderate to strong interrater reliability. Conclusions.— We report development and statistical analysis of a novel SBP project evaluation rubric. The results indicate the rubric can be used to reliably assess pathology residents' critical thinking skills in SBP.

Reliability and Validity Analyses of the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Schmidt ◽  
Robert D. Hoge ◽  
Lezlie Gomes
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Level Of Service ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Criminogenic Needs ◽  
Health Assessments ◽  
Males And Females

The Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) is a structured assessment tool designed to facilitate the effective intervention and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders by assessing each youth’s risk level and criminogenic needs. The present study examined the YLS/CMI’s reliability and validity in a sample of 107 juvenile offenders who were court-referred for mental health assessments. Results demonstrated the YLS/CMI’s internal consistency and interrater reliability. Moreover, the instrument’s predictive validity was substantiated on a number of recidivism measures for both males and females. Limitations of the current findings are discussed.

scholarly journals Reliability Assessment of Scores From Video-Recorded TGMD-3 Performances

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauli Olavi Rintala ◽  
Arja Kaarina Sääkslahti ◽  
Susanna Iivonen
Keyword(s):  
Motor Development ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Kappa Statistic ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Gross Motor ◽  
Gross Motor Development ◽  
Percent Agreement ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Ball Skills

This study examined the intrarater and interrater reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—3rd Edition (TGMD-3). Participants were 60 Finnish children aged between 3 and 9 years, divided into three separate samples of 20. Two samples of 20 were used to examine the intrarater reliability of two different assessors, and the third sample of 20 was used to establish interrater reliability. Children’s TGMD-3 performances were video-recorded and later assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient, a kappa statistic, and a percent agreement calculation. The intrarater reliability of the locomotor subtest, ball skills subtest, and gross motor total score ranged from 0.69 to 0.77, and percent agreement ranged from 87 to 91%. The interrater reliability of the locomotor subtest, ball skills subtest, and gross motor total score ranged from 0.56 to 0.64. Percent agreement of 83% was observed for locomotor skills, ball skills, and total skills, respectively. Hop, horizontal jump, and two-hand strike assessments showed the most difference between the assessors. These results show acceptable reliability for the TGMD-3 to analyze children’s gross motor skills.

scholarly journals Examining Interrater Reliability and Validity of a Paediatric Cardiopulmonary Physiotherapy Discharge Tool

2014 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Lati ◽  
Vanessa Pellow ◽  
Jeannine Sproule ◽  
Dina Brooks ◽  
Cindy Ellerton
Keyword(s):  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Reliability And Validity

scholarly journals A standardized nomenclature for cervical spine soft-tissue release and osteotomy for deformity correction

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P. Ames ◽  
Justin S. Smith ◽  
Justin K. Scheer ◽  
Christopher I. Shaffrey ◽  
Virginie Lafage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Spine ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Soft Tissue Release ◽  
Spine Deformity ◽  
Intrarater Reliability ◽  
Perfect Agreement ◽  
Moderate Agreement ◽  
Posterior Anterior ◽  
Anterior Posterior

Object Cervical spine osteotomies are powerful techniques to correct rigid cervical spine deformity. Many variations exist, however, and there is no current standardized system with which to describe and classify cervical osteotomies. This complicates the ability to compare outcomes across procedures and studies. The authors' objective was to establish a universal nomenclature for cervical spine osteotomies to provide a common language among spine surgeons. Methods A proposed nomenclature with 7 anatomical grades of increasing extent of bone/soft tissue resection and destabilization was designed. The highest grade of resection is termed the major osteotomy, and an approach modifier is used to denote the surgical approach(es), including anterior (A), posterior (P), anterior-posterior (AP), posterior-anterior (PA), anterior-posterior-anterior (APA), and posterior-anterior-posterior (PAP). For cases in which multiple grades of osteotomies were performed, the highest grade is termed the major osteotomy, and lower-grade osteotomies are termed minor osteotomies. The nomenclature was evaluated by 11 reviewers through 25 different radiographic clinical cases. The review was performed twice, separated by a minimum 1-week interval. Reliability was assessed using Fleiss kappa coefficients. Results The average intrarater reliability was classified as “almost perfect agreement” for the major osteotomy (0.89 [range 0.60–1.00]) and approach modifier (0.99 [0.95–1.00]); it was classified as “moderate agreement” for the minor osteotomy (0.73 [range 0.41–1.00]). The average interrater reliability for the 2 readings was the following: major osteotomy, 0.87 (“almost perfect agreement”); approach modifier, 0.99 (“almost perfect agreement”); and minor osteotomy, 0.55 (“moderate agreement”). Analysis of only major osteotomy plus approach modifier yielded a classification that was “almost perfect” with an average intrarater reliability of 0.90 (0.63–1.00) and an interrater reliability of 0.88 and 0.86 for the two reviews. Conclusions The proposed cervical spine osteotomy nomenclature provides the surgeon with a simple, standard description of the various cervical osteotomies. The reliability analysis demonstrated that this system is consistent and directly applicable. Future work will evaluate the relationship between this system and health-related quality of life metrics.

“You Say Severe, I Say Mild”: Toward an Empirical Classification of Dysarthria Severity

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Kaila L. Stipancic ◽  
Kira M. Palmer ◽  
Hannah P. Rowe ◽  
Yana Yunusova ◽  
James D. Berry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Speaking Rate ◽  
Response Options ◽  
Cutoff Points ◽  
Healthy Control ◽  
Dysarthric Speech ◽  
Surrogate Measures

Purpose: The main purpose of this study was to create an empirical classification system for speech severity in patients with dysarthria secondary to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by exploring the reliability and validity of speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') ratings of dysarthric speech. Method: Ten SLPs listened to speech samples from 52 speakers with ALS and 20 healthy control speakers. SLPs were asked to rate the speech severity of the speakers using five response options: normal, mild, moderate, severe, and profound. Four severity-surrogate measures were also calculated: SLPs transcribed the speech samples for the calculation of speech intelligibility and rated the effort it took to understand the speakers on a visual analog scale. In addition, speaking rate and intelligible speaking rate were calculated for each speaker. Intrarater and interrater reliability were calculated for each measure. We explored the validity of clinician-based severity ratings by comparing them to the severity-surrogate measures. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were conducted to create optimal cutoff points for defining dysarthria severity categories. Results: Intrarater and interrater reliability for the clinician-based severity ratings were excellent and were comparable to reliability for the severity-surrogate measures explored. Clinician severity ratings were strongly associated with all severity-surrogate measures, suggesting strong construct validity. We also provided a range of values for each severity-surrogate measure within each severity category based on the cutoff points obtained from the ROC analyses. Conclusions: Clinician severity ratings of dysarthric speech are reliable and valid. We discuss the underlying challenges that arise when selecting a stratification measure and offer recommendations for a classification scheme when stratifying patients and research participants into speech severity categories.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document