Cleland Joshua A, Childs John D, Fritz Julie M, Whitman Julie M
Department of Physical Therapy, Franklin Pierce College, Concord, NH, USA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Oct;87(10):1388-95. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.06.011.
To examine the interrater reliability of the history and physical examination in patients with mechanical neck pain.
Single-group repeated measures for interrater reliability.
Outpatient physical therapy clinic.
Twenty-two patients with mechanical neck pain underwent a standardized history and physical examination by a physical therapist.
Following a 5-minute break, a second therapist who was blind to the findings of examiner 1 performed the second standardized history and physical examination.
The Cohen kappa and weighted kappa were used to calculate the interrater reliability of ordinal level data from the history and physical examination. Intraclass correlation coefficients model 2,1 (ICC(2,1)) and the 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine the interrater reliability for continuous variables.
The kappa coefficients ranged from -.06 to .90 for the variables obtained from the history. Reliability values for categorical data collected during the physical examination ranged from no to substantial agreement depending on the particular test and measure. ICC(2,1) for cervical range of motion (ROM) measurements ranged between .66 and .78.
We have reported the interrater reliability of the history and physical examination in a group of patients with a primary report of neck pain. The reliability variables varied considerably for manual assessment techniques and were significantly higher for the examination of muscle length and cervical ROM. Ultimately, it will be up to each clinician to determine if a particular test or measure poses adequate reliability to assist in the clinical decision making process.
检验机械性颈痛患者病史及体格检查的评分者间信度。
采用单组重复测量法评估评分者间信度。
门诊物理治疗诊所。
22例机械性颈痛患者接受了物理治疗师进行的标准化病史及体格检查。
休息5分钟后,另一位对检查者1的检查结果不知情的治疗师进行第二次标准化病史及体格检查。
采用Cohen卡方系数和加权卡方系数计算病史及体格检查中有序水平数据的评分者间信度。计算组内相关系数模型2,1(ICC(2,1))及95%置信区间,以确定连续变量的评分者间信度。
从病史中获取的变量,其卡方系数范围为-0.06至0.90。体格检查中收集的分类数据的信度值,根据具体的检查和测量方法,从无一致性到高度一致性不等。颈椎活动范围(ROM)测量的ICC(2,1)在0.66至0.78之间。
我们报告了一组以颈痛为主要症状的患者病史及体格检查的评分者间信度。手动评估技术的信度变量差异很大,而肌肉长度检查和颈椎ROM检查的信度则显著更高。最终,每个临床医生需要自行判断特定的检查或测量方法是否具有足够的信度,以辅助临床决策过程。