儿童呼吸听诊结果的可信度。

IF 2.1 Q1 Nursing
Sriram Ramgopal, Jennifer K Saper, James R Rudloff, Alexandra T Geanacopoulos, Andrea Rivera-Sepulveda, Theresa Timm, Deborah R Liu, Jane K Soung, Lichuan Liu, Todd A Florin
{"title":"儿童呼吸听诊结果的可信度。","authors":"Sriram Ramgopal, Jennifer K Saper, James R Rudloff, Alexandra T Geanacopoulos, Andrea Rivera-Sepulveda, Theresa Timm, Deborah R Liu, Jane K Soung, Lichuan Liu, Todd A Florin","doi":"10.1542/hpeds.2025-008510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the interrater reliability of pediatric auscultatory findings as assessed by pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a multicenter survey of physicians in 6 academic PEM divisions in the United States. Respondents listened to 15 audio clips of pediatric auscultatory sounds and classified them as normal or as having 1 or more adventitious sounds. We calculated Fleiss' κ to evaluate interrater reliability of auscultatory findings among respondents. We stratified results based on study site and years of experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surveys were distributed to 128 physicians, with responses from 106 (83% response rate). Only the identification of normal breath sounds (κ = 0.46, 95% CI, 0.45-0.47) met threshold criteria for reliability. Other findings did not reach this threshold, including stridor (κ = 0.32, 95% CI, 0.31-0.33), wheeze (κ = 0.25, 95% CI, 0.24-0.25), crackles (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.15-0.16), and rhonchi (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.14-0.15). Some sites demonstrated greater intrarater reliability compared with others. Stratified by years of experience, only interpretation of normal breath sounds and stridor among physicians with 0 to 4 years of experience and the interpretation of normal breath sounds among physicians with 15 or more years of experience reached acceptable reliability. Compared with a reference standard, highest accuracy was noted in the interpretation of normal breath sounds (Accuracy =  0.85, 95% CI, 0.83-0.87).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found poor interrater reliability in the interpretation of most pediatric breath sounds, except in the identification of normal breath sounds. These findings support a need for more robust approaches toward the accurate identification of respiratory pathology in children.</p>","PeriodicalId":38180,"journal":{"name":"Hospital pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interrater Reliability of Pediatric Respiratory Auscultation Findings.\",\"authors\":\"Sriram Ramgopal, Jennifer K Saper, James R Rudloff, Alexandra T Geanacopoulos, Andrea Rivera-Sepulveda, Theresa Timm, Deborah R Liu, Jane K Soung, Lichuan Liu, Todd A Florin\",\"doi\":\"10.1542/hpeds.2025-008510\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the interrater reliability of pediatric auscultatory findings as assessed by pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a multicenter survey of physicians in 6 academic PEM divisions in the United States. Respondents listened to 15 audio clips of pediatric auscultatory sounds and classified them as normal or as having 1 or more adventitious sounds. We calculated Fleiss' κ to evaluate interrater reliability of auscultatory findings among respondents. We stratified results based on study site and years of experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surveys were distributed to 128 physicians, with responses from 106 (83% response rate). Only the identification of normal breath sounds (κ = 0.46, 95% CI, 0.45-0.47) met threshold criteria for reliability. Other findings did not reach this threshold, including stridor (κ = 0.32, 95% CI, 0.31-0.33), wheeze (κ = 0.25, 95% CI, 0.24-0.25), crackles (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.15-0.16), and rhonchi (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.14-0.15). Some sites demonstrated greater intrarater reliability compared with others. Stratified by years of experience, only interpretation of normal breath sounds and stridor among physicians with 0 to 4 years of experience and the interpretation of normal breath sounds among physicians with 15 or more years of experience reached acceptable reliability. Compared with a reference standard, highest accuracy was noted in the interpretation of normal breath sounds (Accuracy =  0.85, 95% CI, 0.83-0.87).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found poor interrater reliability in the interpretation of most pediatric breath sounds, except in the identification of normal breath sounds. These findings support a need for more robust approaches toward the accurate identification of respiratory pathology in children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hospital pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hospital pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2025-008510\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2025-008510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价儿科急诊医师对小儿听诊结果的判读可靠性。方法:我们对美国6个学术PEM部门的医生进行了多中心调查。受访者听了15个儿童听诊声音的音频片段,并将其分类为正常声音或具有1个或多个外来声音。我们计算了Fleiss’k来评估听诊结果在被调查者之间的可信度。我们根据研究地点和多年的经验对结果进行分层。结果:共向128名医生发放调查问卷,106名医生回复,回复率83%。只有正常呼吸音的识别(κ = 0.46, 95% CI, 0.45-0.47)符合可靠性的阈值标准。其他未达到该阈值的发现包括喘鸣(κ = 0.32, 95% CI, 0.31-0.33)、喘息(κ = 0.25, 95% CI, 0.24-0.25)、噼啪声(κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.15-0.16)和隆齐(κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.14-0.15)。与其他站点相比,一些站点显示出更高的内部可靠性。按经验年数分层,只有0 - 4年经验的医生对正常呼吸音和喘鸣的解释和15年或以上经验的医生对正常呼吸音的解释达到可接受的可靠性。与参考标准相比,正常呼吸音的解释准确率最高(准确率= 0.85,95% CI, 0.83-0.87)。结论:除了正常呼吸音的识别外,我们发现大多数儿童呼吸音的解释可靠性较差。这些发现支持需要更可靠的方法来准确识别儿童呼吸病理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interrater Reliability of Pediatric Respiratory Auscultation Findings.

Objective: To evaluate the interrater reliability of pediatric auscultatory findings as assessed by pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter survey of physicians in 6 academic PEM divisions in the United States. Respondents listened to 15 audio clips of pediatric auscultatory sounds and classified them as normal or as having 1 or more adventitious sounds. We calculated Fleiss' κ to evaluate interrater reliability of auscultatory findings among respondents. We stratified results based on study site and years of experience.

Results: Surveys were distributed to 128 physicians, with responses from 106 (83% response rate). Only the identification of normal breath sounds (κ = 0.46, 95% CI, 0.45-0.47) met threshold criteria for reliability. Other findings did not reach this threshold, including stridor (κ = 0.32, 95% CI, 0.31-0.33), wheeze (κ = 0.25, 95% CI, 0.24-0.25), crackles (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.15-0.16), and rhonchi (κ = 0.15, 95% CI, 0.14-0.15). Some sites demonstrated greater intrarater reliability compared with others. Stratified by years of experience, only interpretation of normal breath sounds and stridor among physicians with 0 to 4 years of experience and the interpretation of normal breath sounds among physicians with 15 or more years of experience reached acceptable reliability. Compared with a reference standard, highest accuracy was noted in the interpretation of normal breath sounds (Accuracy =  0.85, 95% CI, 0.83-0.87).

Conclusion: We found poor interrater reliability in the interpretation of most pediatric breath sounds, except in the identification of normal breath sounds. These findings support a need for more robust approaches toward the accurate identification of respiratory pathology in children.

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
Hospital pediatrics
Hospital pediatrics Nursing-Pediatrics
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
204
×
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