[Interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction in women].

Ana Silvia Vidal-Brandt, Patricia Castro-Núñez, Immer Noyola-Ávila, Uziel Rodríguez-Muñoz, Efraín Maldonado-Alcaraz, Jorge Moreno-Palacios
{"title":"[Interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction in women].","authors":"Ana Silvia Vidal-Brandt, Patricia Castro-Núñez, Immer Noyola-Ávila, Uziel Rodríguez-Muñoz, Efraín Maldonado-Alcaraz, Jorge Moreno-Palacios","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.8319775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in women is a challenge for functional urology. In Mexico there are few data that report the prevalence of OTSV in women, being up to 24% in a group of patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare six different definitions of bladder outlet obstruction and evaluate the interobserver agreement in an educational setting.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Urodynamic studies (UDS) of women with and without diagnosis of BOO were retrospectively assesed. Farrar, Chassagne, Lemack, Defreitas, Blavais and Groutz, Solomon-Greenwell definitions were evaluated. All UDS were independently reviewed by 5 observers. The easiest, the hardest and the fastest were chosen. Interobserver agreement to classify the patients as obstructed was assessed by kappa reliability statistical analysis. We classified the type of mistakes the participants made; error of interpretation and miscalculation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 28 urodynamic studies were reviewed. All observers had a substantial agreement (0.64-0.78) to classify BOO using all but Lemack and Solomon-Greenwell definitions. A total 120 errors from 840 responses were found; 45.8% errors of interpretation of UDS and 54.1% miscalculation of the equation. Finally, all the participants chose the Solomon-Greenwell was the most difficult definition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Chassagne, Defreitas and Farrar definitions proved substantial interobserver agreement. Solomon-Greenwell and Lemack´s definitions had the highest number of pitfalls and the lowest level of agreement.</p>","PeriodicalId":94200,"journal":{"name":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10746333/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8319775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in women is a challenge for functional urology. In Mexico there are few data that report the prevalence of OTSV in women, being up to 24% in a group of patients.

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare six different definitions of bladder outlet obstruction and evaluate the interobserver agreement in an educational setting.

Material and methods: Urodynamic studies (UDS) of women with and without diagnosis of BOO were retrospectively assesed. Farrar, Chassagne, Lemack, Defreitas, Blavais and Groutz, Solomon-Greenwell definitions were evaluated. All UDS were independently reviewed by 5 observers. The easiest, the hardest and the fastest were chosen. Interobserver agreement to classify the patients as obstructed was assessed by kappa reliability statistical analysis. We classified the type of mistakes the participants made; error of interpretation and miscalculation.

Results: A total of 28 urodynamic studies were reviewed. All observers had a substantial agreement (0.64-0.78) to classify BOO using all but Lemack and Solomon-Greenwell definitions. A total 120 errors from 840 responses were found; 45.8% errors of interpretation of UDS and 54.1% miscalculation of the equation. Finally, all the participants chose the Solomon-Greenwell was the most difficult definition.

Conclusion: Chassagne, Defreitas and Farrar definitions proved substantial interobserver agreement. Solomon-Greenwell and Lemack´s definitions had the highest number of pitfalls and the lowest level of agreement.

[观察者间对女性膀胱出口梗阻诊断的一致性]。
背景:女性膀胱出口梗阻(BOO)的诊断是功能性泌尿外科面临的挑战。在墨西哥,很少有数据报告女性OTSV的患病率,在一组患者中高达24%。目的:本研究的目的是比较膀胱出口梗阻的六种不同定义,并在教育环境中评估观察者之间的一致性。材料和方法:对诊断为BOO和未诊断为BOO的女性的尿动力学研究(UDS)进行回顾性评价。评估了Farrar、Chassagne、Lemack、Defreitas、Blavais和Groutz、Solomon-Greenwell的定义。5名观察员对所有UDS进行了独立审查。选出了最容易的、最难的和最快的。通过kappa可靠性统计分析评估观察者之间将患者分类为阻塞的一致性。我们对参与者犯的错误类型进行了分类;解释错误和计算错误。结果:共回顾了28项尿动力学研究。除Lemack和Solomon-Greenwell定义外,所有观察者对BOO的分类基本一致(0.64-0.78)。共发现840个响应中的120个错误;UDS解释错误45.8%,方程计算错误54.1%。最后,所有参与者都选择了所罗门-格林威尔是最难定义的。结论:Chassagne、Defreitas和Farrar的定义证明了观察者之间的一致性。Solomon Greenwell和Lemack的定义陷阱数量最多,一致性最低。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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