Interobserver Agreement in Pediatric Asthma Examination Findings Between Emergency Medical Services and Emergency Department Clinicians.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Michael F Taylor, Caleb E Ward, Jennifer F Anders, Adjoa A Andoh, James M Chamberlain, Nidhya Navanandan, Sylvia Owusu-Ansah, Kyle Schmucker, Bobbe Thomas, Kathleen M Brown
{"title":"Interobserver Agreement in Pediatric Asthma Examination Findings Between Emergency Medical Services and Emergency Department Clinicians.","authors":"Michael F Taylor, Caleb E Ward, Jennifer F Anders, Adjoa A Andoh, James M Chamberlain, Nidhya Navanandan, Sylvia Owusu-Ansah, Kyle Schmucker, Bobbe Thomas, Kathleen M Brown","doi":"10.1080/10903127.2026.2717525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Asthma exacerbations constitute 10-15% of all pediatric emergency medical services (EMS) calls. There are several validated scoring tools to assess acute asthma severity, which have good inter-rater reliability and correlate with clinical outcomes in the emergency department (ED), but have not been validated with EMS clinicians. This study sought to assess the level of agreement between EMS and ED clinicians on components of asthma scoring tools to inform a prehospital asthma severity scoring tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective observational study of children 2-18 years old transported by EMS with an impression of asthma exacerbation to five pediatric EDs. EMS and ED clinicians independently completed surveys assessing the patient's exam on arrival to the ED. Survey items were drawn from existing asthma scoring tools and refined by focus groups and a Delphi process with EMS clinicians and expert stakeholders. To determine agreement between EMS and ED clinicians regarding survey items, inter-rater reliability was calculated using Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient for binary and ordinal variables, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled a convenience sample of 295 children with a median age of 7 years (inter-quartile range 3-12 years). There was slight agreement among EMS and ED clinicians (κ = 0.01-0.20) for suprasternal retractions and fair agreement (κ = 0.21-0.40) for tachypnea, accessory muscle use, and elevated respiratory rate. There was poor agreement (ICC = 0-0.50) for breathlessness, work of breathing, degree of hypoxia, type of wheeze, and wheezing intensity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed limited agreement between EMS and ED clinicians when assessing children for components of asthma severity scores. Developing a prehospital asthma exacerbation severity scoring tool to guide EMS interventions may be challenging. Further research is needed to determine whether education improves EMS performance with asthma scoring tools or whether standardized EMS asthma protocols, regardless of exacerbation severity, improve patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":20336,"journal":{"name":"Prehospital Emergency Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prehospital Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2026.2717525","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Asthma exacerbations constitute 10-15% of all pediatric emergency medical services (EMS) calls. There are several validated scoring tools to assess acute asthma severity, which have good inter-rater reliability and correlate with clinical outcomes in the emergency department (ED), but have not been validated with EMS clinicians. This study sought to assess the level of agreement between EMS and ED clinicians on components of asthma scoring tools to inform a prehospital asthma severity scoring tool.

Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of children 2-18 years old transported by EMS with an impression of asthma exacerbation to five pediatric EDs. EMS and ED clinicians independently completed surveys assessing the patient's exam on arrival to the ED. Survey items were drawn from existing asthma scoring tools and refined by focus groups and a Delphi process with EMS clinicians and expert stakeholders. To determine agreement between EMS and ED clinicians regarding survey items, inter-rater reliability was calculated using Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient for binary and ordinal variables, respectively.

Results: We enrolled a convenience sample of 295 children with a median age of 7 years (inter-quartile range 3-12 years). There was slight agreement among EMS and ED clinicians (κ = 0.01-0.20) for suprasternal retractions and fair agreement (κ = 0.21-0.40) for tachypnea, accessory muscle use, and elevated respiratory rate. There was poor agreement (ICC = 0-0.50) for breathlessness, work of breathing, degree of hypoxia, type of wheeze, and wheezing intensity.

Conclusions: We observed limited agreement between EMS and ED clinicians when assessing children for components of asthma severity scores. Developing a prehospital asthma exacerbation severity scoring tool to guide EMS interventions may be challenging. Further research is needed to determine whether education improves EMS performance with asthma scoring tools or whether standardized EMS asthma protocols, regardless of exacerbation severity, improve patient outcomes.

急诊医疗服务和急诊科临床医生之间儿童哮喘检查结果的观察者间一致。
目的:哮喘加重占所有儿科紧急医疗服务(EMS)呼叫的10-15%。有几种经过验证的评估急性哮喘严重程度的评分工具,它们具有良好的评分间可靠性,并与急诊科(ED)的临床结果相关,但尚未得到EMS临床医生的验证。本研究旨在评估EMS和ED临床医生对哮喘评分工具组成部分的一致程度,以告知院前哮喘严重程度评分工具。方法:我们对2-18岁的儿童进行了前瞻性观察研究,这些儿童被EMS运送到5个儿科急诊室,并有哮喘加重的印象。EMS和ED的临床医生独立完成调查,评估患者到达急诊室时的检查。调查项目来自现有的哮喘评分工具,并通过焦点小组和EMS临床医生和专家利益相关者的德尔菲过程进行完善。为了确定EMS和ED临床医生对调查项目的一致性,分别使用Kappa和二元和有序变量的类内相关系数计算了评分间信度。结果:我们纳入了295名儿童的方便样本,中位年龄为7岁(四分位数间范围为3-12岁)。EMS和ED的临床医生在胸骨上缩回方面有轻微一致(κ = 0.01-0.20),在呼吸急促、副肌使用和呼吸频率升高方面有相当一致(κ = 0.21-0.40)。呼吸困难、呼吸功、缺氧程度、喘息类型和喘息强度的一致性较差(ICC = 0-0.50)。结论:我们观察到EMS和ED临床医生在评估儿童哮喘严重程度评分时的有限一致性。开发院前哮喘恶化严重程度评分工具来指导EMS干预可能具有挑战性。需要进一步的研究来确定教育是否能提高EMS使用哮喘评分工具的表现,或者标准化的EMS哮喘方案是否能改善患者的预后,而不考虑恶化严重程度。
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
Prehospital Emergency Care
Prehospital Emergency Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
137
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Prehospital Emergency Care publishes peer-reviewed information relevant to the practice, educational advancement, and investigation of prehospital emergency care, including the following types of articles: Special Contributions - Original Articles - Education and Practice - Preliminary Reports - Case Conferences - Position Papers - Collective Reviews - Editorials - Letters to the Editor - Media Reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书