Department of Children's Anaesthesia, Women's and Children's Hospital, North Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Anaesthesia. 2012 Apr;67(4):361-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06998.x. Epub 2012 Feb 13.
The SHAM (Serious Harm and Morbidity) scale was developed to categorise the severity of potential complications of placebo control interventions in the context of local anaesthesia research. A convenience sample of 43 anaesthetists used the SHAM scale to grade ten published randomised controlled trials investigating local anaesthesia nerve blocks. The Fleiss κ statistic assessed agreement between these anaesthetists and probability of random agreement (Pr(e)) when using the SHAM scale; a κ > 0 shows concordance between assessors above random agreement. Overall κ was 0.50 (95% CI 0.49-0.51, p < 0.001), Pr(e) = 0.21. There was moderate agreement between assessors in determining whether studies were low-risk (SHAM score 0-2) or high-risk (SHAM score 3-4) (κ 0.60 (95% CI 0.58-0.62), Pr(e) = 0.51). Compared with anaesthetists given clinical examples of interventions when applying the SHAM score, anaesthetists who were not given examples showed significantly less inter-individual agreement (κ 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.81), Pr(e) = 0.5 vs 0.45 (95% CI 0.41-0.49), Pr(e) = 0.52, p < 0.0001). These results suggest that the SHAM score can be successfully used to grade the severity of potential complications of placebo-controlled interventions in local anaesthesia research and represent a first step towards the score's validation.
SHAM(严重伤害和发病)量表旨在对局部麻醉研究中安慰剂对照干预潜在并发症的严重程度进行分类。43 名麻醉师对 10 项已发表的局部麻醉神经阻滞随机对照试验使用 SHAM 量表进行了分级。Fleiss κ 统计评估了这些麻醉师之间的一致性以及使用 SHAM 量表时随机一致性的概率(Pr(e));κ>0 表示评估者之间的一致性高于随机一致性。总体 κ 值为 0.50(95%CI 0.49-0.51,p<0.001),Pr(e)=0.21。评估者在确定研究是低风险(SHAM 评分 0-2)还是高风险(SHAM 评分 3-4)方面具有中等一致性(κ 值为 0.60(95%CI 0.58-0.62),Pr(e)=0.51)。与应用 SHAM 评分时给予临床干预示例的麻醉师相比,未给予示例的麻醉师之间的个体间一致性明显较低(κ 值为 0.76(95%CI 0.72-0.81),Pr(e)=0.5 与 0.45(95%CI 0.41-0.49),Pr(e)=0.52,p<0.0001)。这些结果表明,SHAM 评分可成功用于对局部麻醉研究中安慰剂对照干预潜在并发症的严重程度进行分级,这是该评分验证的第一步。