不同临床经验的整骨师在矢状面跑步步态分析上的可信度:一项初步研究

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Nicholas Tripodi , Thomas Dagiandis , Ali Hameed , Liam Heilberg , Erick Olbinski , Cameron Reid , Alexander White , Patrick McLaughlin
{"title":"不同临床经验的整骨师在矢状面跑步步态分析上的可信度:一项初步研究","authors":"Nicholas Tripodi ,&nbsp;Thomas Dagiandis ,&nbsp;Ali Hameed ,&nbsp;Liam Heilberg ,&nbsp;Erick Olbinski ,&nbsp;Cameron Reid ,&nbsp;Alexander White ,&nbsp;Patrick McLaughlin","doi":"10.1016/j.ijosm.2022.11.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Clinical running analysis is commonly employed in the screening of running related injuries. Currently, there remains little research exploring the use of clinical running analysis within the osteopathic profession. Hence, the aim of this pilot study is to investigate the inter-rater reliability of sagittal plane visual gait observation amongst osteopathic practitioners.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fourteen osteopaths were recruited through an online platform. Each participant completed five, 11-item gait analysis forms, with each form corresponding to a different running gait video recorded in the sagittal plane. Krippendorff's alpha (Kα) was calculated to determine the inter-rater reliability between all participants, and between groups based on years of clinical experience.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Very low inter-rater reliability was found between all participants (Kα&lt;0.67) across all questions. Strong reliability was found for two questions answered by the 5–10 years’ experience group (Kα&lt;0.8155) with regard to foot strike in the runners.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The poor inter-rater reliability found in this pilot study, is in disagreement with previous research that has identified high inter-rater reliability with practitioners of varied clinical experience on a similar gait analysis task. These discrepancies may be explained by a range of methodological differences and limitations, chiefly the sample size and the objective nature of the kinematic observation tasks.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The results of this pilot study indicate there is very low reliability between this group of clinicians interpretation of running gait. Building on from this, future research should investigate clinician inter-rater reliability using more objective gait analysis measures.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inter-rater reliability between osteopaths of differing clinical experience on sagittal plane running gait analysis: A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas Tripodi ,&nbsp;Thomas Dagiandis ,&nbsp;Ali Hameed ,&nbsp;Liam Heilberg ,&nbsp;Erick Olbinski ,&nbsp;Cameron Reid ,&nbsp;Alexander White ,&nbsp;Patrick McLaughlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijosm.2022.11.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Clinical running analysis is commonly employed in the screening of running related injuries. Currently, there remains little research exploring the use of clinical running analysis within the osteopathic profession. Hence, the aim of this pilot study is to investigate the inter-rater reliability of sagittal plane visual gait observation amongst osteopathic practitioners.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Fourteen osteopaths were recruited through an online platform. Each participant completed five, 11-item gait analysis forms, with each form corresponding to a different running gait video recorded in the sagittal plane. Krippendorff's alpha (Kα) was calculated to determine the inter-rater reliability between all participants, and between groups based on years of clinical experience.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Very low inter-rater reliability was found between all participants (Kα&lt;0.67) across all questions. Strong reliability was found for two questions answered by the 5–10 years’ experience group (Kα&lt;0.8155) with regard to foot strike in the runners.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The poor inter-rater reliability found in this pilot study, is in disagreement with previous research that has identified high inter-rater reliability with practitioners of varied clinical experience on a similar gait analysis task. These discrepancies may be explained by a range of methodological differences and limitations, chiefly the sample size and the objective nature of the kinematic observation tasks.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The results of this pilot study indicate there is very low reliability between this group of clinicians interpretation of running gait. Building on from this, future research should investigate clinician inter-rater reliability using more objective gait analysis measures.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51068,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068922001006\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068922001006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的临床跑步分析是筛查跑步相关损伤的常用方法。目前,很少有研究探索临床运行分析在骨科专业中的应用。因此,本初步研究的目的是调查骨科医生矢状面视觉步态观察的可靠性。方法通过网络平台招募14名整骨医生。每个参与者完成了5个11项的步态分析表格,每个表格对应于在矢状面记录的不同的跑步步态视频。Krippendorff’s alpha (Kα)的计算是为了确定所有参与者之间以及基于多年临床经验的组与组之间的评估信度。结果所有参与者在所有问题上的信度都很低(Kα<0.67)。5-10年经验组(Kα<0.8155)回答的关于跑步者足击的两个问题具有很强的信度。在这项初步研究中发现的较差的内部信度与先前的研究不一致,之前的研究发现,在类似的步态分析任务中,不同临床经验的从业者具有较高的内部信度。这些差异可以用一系列方法上的差异和限制来解释,主要是样本量和运动观察任务的客观性质。结论本初步研究的结果表明,这组临床医生对跑步步态的解释可靠性很低。在此基础上,未来的研究应该使用更客观的步态分析措施来调查临床医生之间的可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inter-rater reliability between osteopaths of differing clinical experience on sagittal plane running gait analysis: A pilot study

Objective

Clinical running analysis is commonly employed in the screening of running related injuries. Currently, there remains little research exploring the use of clinical running analysis within the osteopathic profession. Hence, the aim of this pilot study is to investigate the inter-rater reliability of sagittal plane visual gait observation amongst osteopathic practitioners.

Methods

Fourteen osteopaths were recruited through an online platform. Each participant completed five, 11-item gait analysis forms, with each form corresponding to a different running gait video recorded in the sagittal plane. Krippendorff's alpha (Kα) was calculated to determine the inter-rater reliability between all participants, and between groups based on years of clinical experience.

Results

Very low inter-rater reliability was found between all participants (Kα<0.67) across all questions. Strong reliability was found for two questions answered by the 5–10 years’ experience group (Kα<0.8155) with regard to foot strike in the runners.

Discussion

The poor inter-rater reliability found in this pilot study, is in disagreement with previous research that has identified high inter-rater reliability with practitioners of varied clinical experience on a similar gait analysis task. These discrepancies may be explained by a range of methodological differences and limitations, chiefly the sample size and the objective nature of the kinematic observation tasks.

Conclusion

The results of this pilot study indicate there is very low reliability between this group of clinicians interpretation of running gait. Building on from this, future research should investigate clinician inter-rater reliability using more objective gait analysis measures.

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
2.20
自引率
36.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal that provides for the publication of high quality research articles and review papers that are as broad as the many disciplines that influence and underpin the principles and practice of osteopathic medicine. Particular emphasis is given to basic science research, clinical epidemiology and health social science in relation to osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine. The Editorial Board encourages submission of articles based on both quantitative and qualitative research designs. The Editorial Board also aims to provide a forum for discourse and debate on any aspect of osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine with the aim of critically evaluating existing practices in regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders and somatic dysfunction. All manuscripts submitted to the IJOM are subject to a blinded review process. The categories currently available for publication include reports of original research, review papers, commentaries and articles related to clinical practice, including case reports. Further details can be found in the IJOM Instructions for Authors. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the understanding that no substantial part has been, or will be published elsewhere.
×
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