麻醉医师在使用美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分类系统时的相互差异。

Q3 Medicine
Amit Sharma Bhattarai, Navindra Raj Bista, Madindra Bahadur Basnet, Deepak Raj Joshi, Anil Shrestha
{"title":"麻醉医师在使用美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分类系统时的相互差异。","authors":"Amit Sharma Bhattarai, Navindra Raj Bista, Madindra Bahadur Basnet, Deepak Raj Joshi, Anil Shrestha","doi":"10.33314/jnhrc.v21i4.4542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status classification is deployed by the anaesthesiologists worldwide to classify operative surgical patients. Many studies have found moderate degree of interrater variability among anaesthesiologists. The general objective of the study was to find out interrater variability among Nepalese anesthesiologists using this classification system in Nepal. The specific objectives of the study were to find out the correctness of assignment and inter-rater variability among anaesthesiologists based on their experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten clinical cases were distributed among 130 registered anaesthesiologist practitioners of Nepal after validation with the experts. Respondents were asked to assign each of ten cases to a specific physical status class. Anaesthesiologists were classified to two classes based on clinical experience as having more or less than five years of experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found substantial agreement among < 5 year's (0.66) and > 5 year's experience group (0.753) and among all raters (0.736). The mean score of the group with less than 5 years of experience was more. There was no significant difference between the mean score (p = 0.595). Overall mean score for the both groups was 5.66 with SD 1.66. There was no significant difference between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study shows that there is very less variation among registered practising anaesthesiologists of Nepal using American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification system.</p>","PeriodicalId":16380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","volume":"21 4","pages":"543-549"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interrater Variability among Anaesthesiologists Using American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System.\",\"authors\":\"Amit Sharma Bhattarai, Navindra Raj Bista, Madindra Bahadur Basnet, Deepak Raj Joshi, Anil Shrestha\",\"doi\":\"10.33314/jnhrc.v21i4.4542\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status classification is deployed by the anaesthesiologists worldwide to classify operative surgical patients. Many studies have found moderate degree of interrater variability among anaesthesiologists. The general objective of the study was to find out interrater variability among Nepalese anesthesiologists using this classification system in Nepal. The specific objectives of the study were to find out the correctness of assignment and inter-rater variability among anaesthesiologists based on their experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten clinical cases were distributed among 130 registered anaesthesiologist practitioners of Nepal after validation with the experts. Respondents were asked to assign each of ten cases to a specific physical status class. Anaesthesiologists were classified to two classes based on clinical experience as having more or less than five years of experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found substantial agreement among < 5 year's (0.66) and > 5 year's experience group (0.753) and among all raters (0.736). The mean score of the group with less than 5 years of experience was more. There was no significant difference between the mean score (p = 0.595). Overall mean score for the both groups was 5.66 with SD 1.66. There was no significant difference between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study shows that there is very less variation among registered practising anaesthesiologists of Nepal using American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification system.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council\",\"volume\":\"21 4\",\"pages\":\"543-549\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v21i4.4542\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nepal Health Research Council","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33314/jnhrc.v21i4.4542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全世界的麻醉医师都采用美国麻醉医师协会的身体状况分类法对手术患者进行分类。许多研究发现,麻醉医师之间存在一定程度的互异性。本研究的总体目标是了解尼泊尔麻醉医师在使用该分类系统时的相互差异。研究的具体目标是根据麻醉科医生的经验,了解他们分配任务的正确性和评分者之间的差异性:方法:经专家验证后,在尼泊尔 130 名注册麻醉医师中分发了 10 个临床病例。受访者被要求将十个病例分别归入一个特定的身体状况等级。根据临床经验,麻醉师被分为拥有五年以上或五年以下经验的两个等级:我们发现,临床经验少于 5 年组(0.66)和临床经验多于 5 年组(0.753)以及所有评分者之间(0.736)的评分基本一致。工作经验少于 5 年组的平均得分更高。平均分之间没有明显差异(p = 0.595)。两组的总平均分为 5.66,标准差为 1.66。结论:研究表明,尼泊尔注册执业麻醉医师在使用美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分类系统时差异很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interrater Variability among Anaesthesiologists Using American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System.

Background: The American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status classification is deployed by the anaesthesiologists worldwide to classify operative surgical patients. Many studies have found moderate degree of interrater variability among anaesthesiologists. The general objective of the study was to find out interrater variability among Nepalese anesthesiologists using this classification system in Nepal. The specific objectives of the study were to find out the correctness of assignment and inter-rater variability among anaesthesiologists based on their experience.

Methods: Ten clinical cases were distributed among 130 registered anaesthesiologist practitioners of Nepal after validation with the experts. Respondents were asked to assign each of ten cases to a specific physical status class. Anaesthesiologists were classified to two classes based on clinical experience as having more or less than five years of experience.

Results: We found substantial agreement among < 5 year's (0.66) and > 5 year's experience group (0.753) and among all raters (0.736). The mean score of the group with less than 5 years of experience was more. There was no significant difference between the mean score (p = 0.595). Overall mean score for the both groups was 5.66 with SD 1.66. There was no significant difference between the groups.

Conclusions: The study shows that there is very less variation among registered practising anaesthesiologists of Nepal using American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification system.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes articles related to researches done in the field of biomedical sciences related to all the discipline of the medical sciences, medical education, public health, health care management, including ethical and social issues pertaining to health. The journal gives preference to clinically oriented studies over experimental and animal studies. The Journal would publish peer-reviewed original research papers, case reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Editorial, Guest Editorial, Viewpoint and letter to the editor are solicited by the editorial board. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding manuscript submission and processing at JNHRC.
×
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