Grading lumbar foraminal stenosis – Interrater agreement of radiologists and radiology trainees before and after education of a standardised grading scale

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
James Bender, Tobi Kojeku, Eliza Preece
{"title":"Grading lumbar foraminal stenosis – Interrater agreement of radiologists and radiology trainees before and after education of a standardised grading scale","authors":"James Bender,&nbsp;Tobi Kojeku,&nbsp;Eliza Preece","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Lumbar foraminal stenosis is a key contributor to low back pain. Imaging, particularly MRI, is commonly used in the assessment of foraminal stenosis, contributing to treatment planning. The adoption of a standardised grading system to try and improve inter-rater agreement is thought to be of importance. Our study aims to assess the variability of grading lumbar foraminal stenosis amongst reporting doctors, determine whether education about a validated grading scale increases agreement, and determine if these changes persist over time.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A single-site study involving MRI reporting registrars/radiologists was performed. Participants were shown select MRI images and asked to grade the degree of stenosis in each on a 4-point scale. Subsequently, they were educated about Lee et al's grading system and asked to re-grade the cases 1 and 6 weeks later. The level of agreement was calculated using Gwet's AC1 coefficient and Krippendorff's Alpha.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The baseline level of agreement was substantial (AC1 = 0.71). This decreased to a moderate level of agreement post-intervention (AC1 = 0.575 at 1-week, <i>P</i>-value 0.033 and AC1 = 0.598 at 6 weeks, <i>P-</i>value 0.012). A grading of severe stenosis was 21% more likely 6 weeks post-education.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The baseline agreement at our institution was substantial, thought to be due to the single-centre nature of the study. Moderate agreement was achieved after education regarding the Lee et al.'s scale, in-line with other studies, with changes maintained at 6 weeks, showing retention of the scale parameters. Grading of severe stenosis was more common post intervention.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":"68 5","pages":"511-515"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1754-9485.13669","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Lumbar foraminal stenosis is a key contributor to low back pain. Imaging, particularly MRI, is commonly used in the assessment of foraminal stenosis, contributing to treatment planning. The adoption of a standardised grading system to try and improve inter-rater agreement is thought to be of importance. Our study aims to assess the variability of grading lumbar foraminal stenosis amongst reporting doctors, determine whether education about a validated grading scale increases agreement, and determine if these changes persist over time.

Methods

A single-site study involving MRI reporting registrars/radiologists was performed. Participants were shown select MRI images and asked to grade the degree of stenosis in each on a 4-point scale. Subsequently, they were educated about Lee et al's grading system and asked to re-grade the cases 1 and 6 weeks later. The level of agreement was calculated using Gwet's AC1 coefficient and Krippendorff's Alpha.

Results

The baseline level of agreement was substantial (AC1 = 0.71). This decreased to a moderate level of agreement post-intervention (AC1 = 0.575 at 1-week, P-value 0.033 and AC1 = 0.598 at 6 weeks, P-value 0.012). A grading of severe stenosis was 21% more likely 6 weeks post-education.

Conclusion

The baseline agreement at our institution was substantial, thought to be due to the single-centre nature of the study. Moderate agreement was achieved after education regarding the Lee et al.'s scale, in-line with other studies, with changes maintained at 6 weeks, showing retention of the scale parameters. Grading of severe stenosis was more common post intervention.

腰椎椎管狭窄症的分级--放射科医生和放射科实习生在接受标准化分级表教育前后的互译一致性。
导言:腰椎椎管狭窄是导致腰痛的主要原因。影像学,尤其是核磁共振成像,常用于评估椎管狭窄,有助于制定治疗计划。采用标准化的分级系统来提高评分者之间的一致性被认为是非常重要的。我们的研究旨在评估报告医生对腰椎椎管狭窄分级的差异性,确定有关有效分级标准的教育是否会提高一致性,并确定这些变化是否会随着时间的推移而持续:方法:进行了一项由核磁共振成像报告注册医师/放射医师参与的单点研究。研究人员向参与者展示了精选的 MRI 图像,并要求他们对每张图像的狭窄程度进行 4 级评分。随后,他们了解了 Lee 等人的分级系统,并被要求在 1 周和 6 周后对病例重新分级。采用 Gwet's AC1 系数和 Krippendorff's Alpha 计算一致性水平:结果:基线一致性水平很高(AC1 = 0.71)。干预后的一致性降至中等水平(1 周时 AC1 = 0.575,P 值为 0.033;6 周时 AC1 = 0.598,P 值为 0.012)。教育后 6 周的严重狭窄分级可能性增加了 21%:结论:我院的基线一致性很高,这可能与研究的单中心性质有关。在对 Lee 等人的量表进行教育后,结果与其他研究结果基本一致,6 周后变化保持不变,表明量表参数得以保留。严重狭窄的分级在干预后更为常见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信