Vignatelli Luca, Plazzi Giuseppe, Bassein Leona, Barbato Alfredo, De Vincentiis Armando, Lugaresi Elio, D'Alessandro Roberto
Institute of Clinical Neurology, University of Bologna, Italy.
Sleep. 2002 Mar 15;25(2):193-6. doi: 10.1093/sleep/25.2.193.
To estimate the reliability of the diagnosis of narcolepsy after clinical interview and polysomnographic evaluation among sleep medicine doctors, before and after training in application of the International Classification of Sleep Disorders (ICSD).
Videotaped semi-structured interviews of 10 patients complaining of daytime sleepiness of different etiologies. Questions referred to ICSD criteria for narcolepsy. A further series of 10 cases of narcolepsy without cataplexy were simulated, with at least a random one to three of the ICSD polysomnographic criteria at pathological levels.
Seventeen doctors were required to classify each videotaped case as "ascertained," "possible," or "excluded" narcolepsy, in two sessions: one before and one after discussion of ICSD criteria. The observers were invited to confirm or exclude the diagnosis of narcolepsy in the 10 simulated cases, according to the given polysomnographic findings, before and after an agreed proposal of the interpretation of ICSD polysomnographic criteria. Interobserver reliability was calculated using Kappa statistics.
N/A.
Interobserver reliability of clinical judgement improved from "substantial" at baseline (Kappa 0.61) to "almost perfect" after training (Kappa 0.95). Interobserver reliability of polysomnographic findings was "fair" at baseline (Kappa 0.24), unanimous after the proposed interpretation of ICSD polysomnographic criteria.
Baseline reliability of diagnostic judgement in suspected narcolepsy was found satisfactory among Italian sleep medicine doctors. Educational training, based on discussion of ICSD criteria, further improved agreement. Diagnosis based on polysomnographic findings, not reliable at baseline, needed a strict interpretation of ICSD criteria to attain standardization.
评估在应用国际睡眠障碍分类(ICSD)进行培训前后,睡眠医学医生在临床访谈和多导睡眠图评估后对发作性睡病诊断的可靠性。
对10例主诉不同病因白天嗜睡的患者进行录像半结构化访谈。问题涉及ICSD发作性睡病标准。另外模拟了10例无猝倒的发作性睡病病例,其中至少一到三项ICSD多导睡眠图标准处于病理水平。
17名医生被要求在两个阶段将每个录像病例分类为“确诊”、“可能”或“排除”发作性睡病:一个阶段在讨论ICSD标准之前,另一个阶段在讨论之后。根据给定的多导睡眠图结果,在就ICSD多导睡眠图标准解释达成一致提议之前和之后,邀请观察者确认或排除10例模拟病例中的发作性睡病诊断。使用Kappa统计量计算观察者间的可靠性。
无。
临床判断的观察者间可靠性从基线时的“实质性”(Kappa 0.61)提高到培训后的“几乎完美”(Kappa 0.95)。多导睡眠图结果的观察者间可靠性在基线时为“一般”(Kappa 0.24),在对ICSD多导睡眠图标准进行提议解释后达到一致。
意大利睡眠医学医生对疑似发作性睡病的诊断判断基线可靠性令人满意。基于ICSD标准讨论的教育培训进一步提高了一致性。基于多导睡眠图结果的诊断在基线时不可靠,需要对ICSD标准进行严格解释以实现标准化。