Palliative care phase : inter-rater reliability and acceptability in a national study

Background: The concept of palliative care consisting of five distinct, clinically meaningful, phases (stable, unstable, deteriorating, terminal and bereavement) was developed in Australia about 20 years ago and is used routinely for communicating clinical status, care planning, quality improvement and funding. Aim: To test the reliability and acceptability of revised definitions of Palliative Care Phase. Design: Multi-centre cross-sectional study involving pairs of clinicians independently rating patients according to revised definitions of Palliative Care Phase. Setting/participants: Clinicians from 10 Australian palliative care services, including 9 inpatient units and 1 mixed inpatient/community-based service. Results: A total of 102 nursing and medical clinicians participated, undertaking 595 paired assessments of 410 patients, of which 90.7% occurred within 2 h. Clinicians rated 54.8% of patients in the stable phase, 15.8% in the unstable phase, 20.8% in the deteriorating phase and 8.7% in the terminal phase. Overall agreement between clinicians’ rating of Palliative Care Phase was substantial (kappa = 0.67; 95% confidence interval = 0.61–0.70). A moderate level of inter-rater reliability was apparent across all participating sites. The results indicated that Palliative Care Phase was an acceptable measure, with no significant difficulties assigning patients to a Palliative Care Phase and a good fit between assessment of phase and the definition of that phase. The most difficult phase to distinguish from other phases was the deteriorating phase. Conclusion: Policy makers, funders and clinicians can be confident that Palliative Care Phase is a reliable and acceptable measure that can be used for care planning, quality improvement and funding purposes.

Consumer notes clinical indicators : determining inter-rater reliability with multiple users, nominal categories and several cases

A method of determining inter-rater reliability when there are multiple raters, nominal rating categories and several cases is described and applied in the development of an instrument for auditing the ANZCMHN (1995) standards of practice for mental health nursing in New Zealand. Clinical statements (n=41) from the O’Brien et al (2002a, 2003) study, which reflected nursing behaviours contributing to the achievement of the standards of practice, were used to audit consumer files. During two Phases, the clinical indicator statements were refined and rules for judging the achievement of each statement from case note documentation were established. The resultant statements have adequate inter-rater reliability for the assessment of nursing practice with respect to the ANZCMHN (1995) standards of practice.

Inter-rater reliability of the evaluation of muscular chains associated with posture alterations in scoliosis

Background: In the Global postural re-education (GPR) evaluation, posture alterations are associated with anterior or posterior muscular chain impairments. Our goal was to assess the reliability of the GPR muscular chain evaluation. Methods: Design: Inter-rater reliability study. Fifty physical therapists (PTs) and two experts trained in GPR assessed the standing posture from photographs of five youths with idiopathic scoliosis using a posture analysis grid with 23 posture indices (PI). The PTs and experts indicated the muscular chain associated with posture alterations. The PTs were also divided into three groups according to their experience in GPR. Experts' results (after consensus) were used to verify agreement between PTs and experts for muscular chain and posture assessments. We used Kappa coefficients (K) and the percentage of agreement (%A) to assess inter-rater reliability and intra-class coefficients (ICC) for determining agreement between PTs and experts. Results: For the muscular chain evaluation, reliability was moderate to substantial for 12 PI for the PTs (% A: 56 to 82; K: 0.42 to 0.76) and perfect for 19 PI for the experts. For posture assessment, reliability was moderate to substantial for 12 PI for the PTs (% A > 60%; K: 0.42 to 0.75) and moderate to perfect for 18 PI for the experts (% A: 80 to 100; K: 0.55 to 1.00). The agreement between PTs and experts was good for most muscular chain evaluations (18 PI; ICC: 0.82 to 0.99) and PI (19 PI; ICC: 0.78 to 1.00). Conclusions: The GPR muscular chain evaluation has good reliability for most posture indices. GPR evaluation should help guide physical therapists in targeting affected muscles for treatment of abnormal posture patterns.

The inter-rater reliability of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index

The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) is a validated clinical prognostic model for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Our goal was to assess the PESI's inter-rater reliability in patients diagnosed with PE. We prospectively identified consecutive patients diagnosed with PE in the emergency department of a Swiss teaching hospital. For all patients, resident and attending physician raters independently collected the 11 PESI variables. The raters then calculated the PESI total point score and classified patients into one of five PESI risk classes (I-V) and as low (risk classes I/II) versus higher-risk (risk classes III-V). We examined the inter-rater reliability for each of the 11 PESI variables, the PESI total point score, assignment to each of the five PESI risk classes, and classification of patients as low versus higher-risk using kappa ( ) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Among 48 consecutive patients with an objective diagnosis of PE, reliability coefficients between resident and attending physician raters were > 0.60 for 10 of the 11 variables comprising the PESI. The inter-rater reliability for the PESI total point score (ICC: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.94), PESI risk class assignment ( : 0.81, 95% CI: 0.66-0.94), and the classification of patients as low versus higher-risk ( : 0.92, 95% CI: 0.72-0.98) was near perfect. Our results demonstrate the high reproducibility of the PESI, supporting the use of the PESI for risk stratification of patients with PE.

Intra-Rater and Inter-Rater Reliability of a Medical Record Abstraction Study on Transition of Care after Childhood Cancer.

BACKGROUND The abstraction of data from medical records is a widespread practice in epidemiological research. However, studies using this means of data collection rarely report reliability. Within the Transition after Childhood Cancer Study (TaCC) which is based on a medical record abstraction, we conducted a second independent abstraction of data with the aim to assess a) intra-rater reliability of one rater at two time points; b) the possible learning effects between these two time points compared to a gold-standard; and c) inter-rater reliability. METHOD Within the TaCC study we conducted a systematic medical record abstraction in the 9 Swiss clinics with pediatric oncology wards. In a second phase we selected a subsample of medical records in 3 clinics to conduct a second independent abstraction. We then assessed intra-rater reliability at two time points, the learning effect over time (comparing each rater at two time-points with a gold-standard) and the inter-rater reliability of a selected number of variables. We calculated percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa. FINDINGS For the assessment of the intra-rater reliability we included 154 records (80 for rater 1; 74 for rater 2). For the inter-rater reliability we could include 70 records. Intra-rater reliability was substantial to excellent (Cohen's kappa 0-6-0.8) with an observed percentage agreement of 75%-95%. In all variables learning effects were observed. Inter-rater reliability was substantial to excellent (Cohen's kappa 0.70-0.83) with high agreement ranging from 86% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS Our study showed that data abstracted from medical records are reliable. Investigating intra-rater and inter-rater reliability can give confidence to draw conclusions from the abstracted data and increase data quality by minimizing systematic errors.

Appraising the quality of randomized controlled trials: inter-rater reliability for the OTseeker evidence database

Rationale and aims 'OTseeker' is an online database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews relevant to occupational therapy. RCTs are critically appraised and rated for quality using the 'PEDro' scale. We aimed to investigate the inter-rater reliability of the PEDro scale before and after revising rating guidelines. Methods In study 1, five raters scored 100 RCTs using the original PEDro scale guidelines. In study 2, two raters scored 40 different RCTs using revised guidelines. All RCTs were randomly selected from the OTseeker database. Reliability was calculated using Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC (model 2,1)]. Results Inter-rater reliability was 'good to excellent' in the first study (Kappas >= 0.53; ICCs >= 0.71). After revising the rating guidelines, the reliability levels were equivalent or higher to those previously obtained (Kappas >= 0.53; ICCs >= 0.89), except for the item, 'groups similar at baseline', which still had moderate reliability (Kappa = 0.53). In study 2, two PEDro scale items, which had their definitions revised, 'less than 15% dropout' and 'point measures and variability', showed higher reliability. In both studies, the PEDro items with the lowest reliability were 'groups similar at baseline' (Kappas = 0.53), 'less than 15% dropout' (Kappas

The inter-rater reliability of the Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community

Predicting risk of adverse healthcare outcomes is important to enable targeted delivery of interventions. The Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC), designed for use by public health nurses (PHNs), measures the one-year risk of hospitalisation, institutionalisation and death in community-dwelling older adults according to a five-point global risk score: from low (score 1,2), medium (3) and high (4,5). We examined the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the RISC between student PHNs (n=32) and expert raters using six cases (two low, medium and high-risk), scored before and after RISC training. Correlations increased for each adverse outcome, statistically significantly for institutionalisation (r=0.72 to 0.80,p=0.04) and hospitalisation, (r=0.51 to 0.71,p<0.01) but not death. Training improved accuracy for low-risk but not all high-risk cases. Overall, the RISC showed good IRR, which increased after RISC training. That reliability reduced for some high-risk cases suggests that the training programme requires adjustment to further improve IRR.

Towards criterion validity in classroom language analysis: methodological constraints of metadiscourse and inter-rater agreement

This paper reports on a process to validate a revised version of a system for coding classroom discourse in foreign language lessons, a context in which the dual role of language (as content and means of communication) and the speakers' specific pedagogical aims lead to a certain degree of ambiguity in language analysis. The language used by teachers and students has been extensively studied, and a framework of concepts concerning classroom discourse well-established. Models for coding classroom language need, however, to be revised when they are applied to specific research contexts. The application and revision of an initial framework can lead to the development of earlier models, and to the re-definition of previously established categories of analysis that have to be validated. The procedures followed to validate a coding system are related here as guidelines for conducting research under similar circumstances. The advantages of using instruments that incorporate two types of data, that is, quantitative measures and qualitative information from raters' metadiscourse, are discussed, and it is suggested that such procedure can contribute to the process of validation itself, towards attaining reliability of research results, as well as indicate some constraints of the adopted research methodology.

Clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities : establishing reliability, validity, and quality thresholds

Background: In response to the need for more comprehensive quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities, the Clinical Care Indicator (CCI) Tool was developed to collect outcome data as a means of making inferences about quality. A national trial of its effectiveness and a Brisbane-based trial of its use within the quality improvement context determined the CCI Tool represented a potentially valuable addition to the Australian aged care system. This document describes the next phase in the CCI Tool.s development; the aims of which were to establish validity and reliability of the CCI Tool, and to develop quality indicator thresholds (benchmarks) for use in Australia. The CCI Tool is now known as the ResCareQA (Residential Care Quality Assessment). Methods: The study aims were achieved through a combination of quantitative data analysis, and expert panel consultations using modified Delphi process. The expert panel consisted of experienced aged care clinicians, managers, and academics; they were initially consulted to determine face and content validity of the ResCareQA, and later to develop thresholds of quality. To analyse its psychometric properties, ResCareQA forms were completed for all residents (N=498) of nine aged care facilities throughout Queensland. Kappa statistics were used to assess inter-rater and test-retest reliability, and Cronbach.s alpha coefficient calculated to determine internal consistency. For concurrent validity, equivalent items on the ResCareQA and the Resident Classification Scales (RCS) were compared using Spearman.s rank order correlations, while discriminative validity was assessed using known-groups technique, comparing ResCareQA results between groups with differing care needs, as well as between male and female residents. Rank-ordered facility results for each clinical care indicator (CCI) were circulated to the panel; upper and lower thresholds for each CCI were nominated by panel members and refined through a Delphi process. These thresholds indicate excellent care at one extreme and questionable care at the other. Results: Minor modifications were made to the assessment, and it was renamed the ResCareQA. Agreement on its content was reached after two Delphi rounds; the final version contains 24 questions across four domains, enabling generation of 36 CCIs. Both test-retest and inter-rater reliability were sound with median kappa values of 0.74 (test-retest) and 0.91 (inter-rater); internal consistency was not as strong, with a Chronbach.s alpha of 0.46. Because the ResCareQA does not provide a single combined score, comparisons for concurrent validity were made with the RCS on an item by item basis, with most resultant correlations being quite low. Discriminative validity analyses, however, revealed highly significant differences in total number of CCIs between high care and low care groups (t199=10.77, p=0.000), while the differences between male and female residents were not significant (t414=0.56, p=0.58). Clinical outcomes varied both within and between facilities; agreed upper and lower thresholds were finalised after three Delphi rounds. Conclusions: The ResCareQA provides a comprehensive, easily administered means of monitoring quality in residential aged care facilities that can be reliably used on multiple occasions. The relatively modest internal consistency score was likely due to the multi-factorial nature of quality, and the absence of an aggregate result for the assessment. Measurement of concurrent validity proved difficult in the absence of a gold standard, but the sound discriminative validity results suggest that the ResCareQA has acceptable validity and could be confidently used as an indication of care quality within Australian residential aged care facilities. The thresholds, while preliminary due to small sample size, enable users to make judgements about quality within and between facilities. Thus it is recommended the ResCareQA be adopted for wider use.

The reliability, accuracy and minimal detectable difference of a multi-segment kinematic model of the foot-shoe complex

Kinematic models are commonly used to quantify foot and ankle kinematics, yet no marker sets or models have been proven reliable or accurate when wearing shoes. Further, the minimal detectable difference of a developed model is often not reported. We present a kinematic model that is reliable, accurate and sensitive to describe the kinematics of the foot–shoe complex and lower leg during walking gait. In order to achieve this, a new marker set was established, consisting of 25 markers applied on the shoe and skin surface, which informed a four segment kinematic model of the foot–shoe complex and lower leg. Three independent experiments were conducted to determine the reliability, accuracy and minimal detectable difference of the marker set and model. Inter-rater reliability of marker placement on the shoe was proven to be good to excellent (ICC = 0.75–0.98) indicating that markers could be applied reliably between raters. Intra-rater reliability was better for the experienced rater (ICC = 0.68–0.99) than the inexperienced rater (ICC = 0.38–0.97). The accuracy of marker placement along each axis was <6.7 mm for all markers studied. Minimal detectable difference (MDD90) thresholds were defined for each joint; tibiocalcaneal joint – MDD90 = 2.17–9.36°, tarsometatarsal joint – MDD90 = 1.03–9.29° and the metatarsophalangeal joint – MDD90 = 1.75–9.12°. These thresholds proposed are specific for the description of shod motion, and can be used in future research designed at comparing between different footwear.

Palliative care problem severity score: Reliability and acceptability in a national study

Background The Palliative Care Problem Severity Score is a clinician-rated tool to assess problem severity in four palliative care domains (pain, other symptoms, psychological/spiritual, family/carer problems) using a 4-point categorical scale (absent, mild, moderate, severe). Aim To test the reliability and acceptability of the Palliative Care Problem Severity Score. Design: Multi-centre, cross-sectional study involving pairs of clinicians independently rating problem severity using the tool. Setting/participants Clinicians from 10 Australian palliative care services: 9 inpatient units and 1 mixed inpatient/community-based service. Results A total of 102 clinicians participated, with almost 600 paired assessments completed for each domain, involving 420 patients. A total of 91% of paired assessments were undertaken within 2 h. Strength of agreement for three of the four domains was moderate: pain (Kappa = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.36 to 0.49); psychological/spiritual (Kappa = 0.48, 95% confidence interval = 0.42 to 0.54); family/carer (Kappa = 0.45, 95% confidence interval = 0.40 to 0.52). Strength of agreement for the remaining domain (other symptoms) was fair (Kappa = 0.38, 95% confidence interval = 0.32 to 0.45). Conclusion The Palliative Care Problem Severity Score is an acceptable measure, with moderate reliability across three domains. Variability in inter-rater reliability across sites and participant feedback indicate that ongoing education is required to ensure that clinicians understand the purpose of the tool and each of its domains. Raters familiar with the patient they were assessing found it easier to assign problem severity, but this did not improve inter-rater reliability.

Development, reliability and validity of the queensland evaluation of wheelchair skills (QEWS)

- Objectives To develop and test a valid and reliable assessment of wheelchair skills for individuals with spinal cord injuries (SCI); the Queensland Evaluation of Wheelchair Skills (QEWS). - Setting Hospital, Australia. - Methods Phase 1: Four Delphi panel rounds with clinical experts were used to develop the QEWS. Phase 2: Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the QEWS items were examined in 100 people with SCI. Phase 3a: Concurrent validity was investigated by examining the association between QEWS total scores and physiotherapists’ global ratings of wheelchair skill performance. Phase 3b: Construct validity was tested in 20 people with recent SCI by examining change in QEWS total scores between when they first mobilised in a wheelchair and scores obtained 10 weeks later. - Results Phase 1: The QEWS was developed. Phase 2: The intra-class correlation coefficients reflecting the intra-rater reliability and the inter-rater reliability for the QEWS total score were 1.00 and 0.98, with scores being within one point of each other 96 and 91% of the time, respectively. Phase 3a: The QEWS total scores were comparable with the global rating of wheelchair skill performance (r2=0.93). Phase 3b: The QEWS scores changed by a median (interquartile range (IQR)) of 4 (1 to 6) points over the 10-week period following first wheelchair mobilisation. - Conclusion The QEWS is a valid and reliable tool for measuring wheelchair skills in individuals with SCI. The QEWS is efficient and practical to administer and does not require specialised equipment.

Entorhinal cortex volume in older adults: reliability and validity considerations for three published measurement protocols.

Measuring the entorhinal cortex (ERC) is challenging due to lateral border discrimination from the perirhinal cortex. From a sample of 39 nondemented older adults who completed volumetric image scans and verbal memory indices, we examined reliability and validity concerns for three ERC protocols with different lateral boundary guidelines (i.e., Goncharova, Dickerson, Stoub, & deToledo-Morrell, 2001; Honeycutt et al., 1998; Insausti et al., 1998). We used three novice raters to assess inter-rater reliability on a subset of scans (216 total ERCs), with the entire dataset measured by one rater with strong intra-rater reliability on each technique (234 total ERCs). We found moderate to strong inter-rater reliability for two techniques with consistent ERC lateral boundary endpoints (Goncharova, Honeycutt), with negligible to moderate reliability for the technique requiring consideration of collateral sulcal depth (Insausti). Left ERC and story memory associations were moderate and positive for two techniques designed to exclude the perirhinal cortex (Insausti, Goncharova), with the Insausti technique continuing to explain 10% of memory score variance after additionally controlling for depression symptom severity. Right ERC-story memory associations were nonexistent after excluding an outlier. Researchers are encouraged to consider challenges of rater training for ERC techniques and how lateral boundary endpoints may impact structure-function associations.