Suppr超能文献

所有 HEART 评分都一样吗:评估 HEART 评分的操作者间可靠性。

Do all HEART Scores beat the same: evaluating the interoperator reliability of the HEART Score.

机构信息

Accident and Emergency Department, Homerton University Hospital, London, UK.

Health Services Research, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

出版信息

Emerg Med J. 2018 Dec;35(12):732-738. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2018-207540. Epub 2018 Sep 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting with chest pain represent a significant proportion of attendances to the ED. The History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors and Troponin (HEART) Score is validated for the risk stratification of suspected ischaemic chest pain within the ED. The goal of this research was to establish the interoperator reliability of the HEART Score as performed in the ED by different grades of doctor and nurse.

METHODOLOGY

Patients with suspected ischaemic chest pain presenting to the ED of an inner city, London Hospital, were recruited prospectively between January and May 2016. Patients that had been enrolled in the study were interviewed by clinicians from four different categories: senior doctor, junior doctor, senior nurse and junior nurse. Clinicians, blinded to other raters' results, calculated the HEART Scores for each patient with the assistance of a pocket-sized HEART Score card. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated as the primary measure of reliability. 120 patients were required to achieve a desired power of 80%.

RESULTS

88 complete comparisons were obtained. There were no significant differences between the distributions of HEART Scores for each clinician group (p=0.95). The ICC for the overall HEART Score was 0.91 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.93). The ICC for troponin and age were '1', for 'history' 0.41 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.52), 'ECG' 0.64 (95% CI 0.54 to0.73) and 'risk factors' 0.84 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.89).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates very strong overall interoperator reliability between the four groups of clinicians studied. This suggests that the HEART Score is reproducible when used by different professional groups and grade of clinician.

摘要

背景

胸痛患者在急诊科就诊的比例相当高。HEART 评分(病史、心电图、年龄、危险因素和肌钙蛋白)已在急诊科用于疑似缺血性胸痛的风险分层,具有良好的验证性。本研究的目的是评估不同级别医生和护士在急诊科使用 HEART 评分的操作者间可靠性。

方法

2016 年 1 月至 5 月,前瞻性连续纳入伦敦市中心一家医院急诊科以疑似缺血性胸痛就诊的患者。研究人员对 4 组不同级别的医生和护士接诊的患者进行访谈:高年资医生、低年资医生、高年资护士和低年资护士。临床医生在袖珍版 HEART 评分卡的协助下,独立为每位患者计算 HEART 评分,结果不向其他评分者公开。采用组内相关系数(ICC)作为主要可靠性指标,需要纳入 120 例患者以达到 80%的预期效能。

结果

共获得 88 例完整比较。各临床医生组的 HEART 评分分布无显著差异(p=0.95)。总体 HEART 评分的 ICC 为 0.91(95%CI 0.87 至 0.93)。肌钙蛋白和年龄的 ICC 为“1”,“病史”为 0.41(95%CI 0.30 至 0.52),“心电图”为 0.64(95%CI 0.54 至 0.73),“危险因素”为 0.84(95%CI 0.79 至 0.89)。

结论

本研究表明,4 组临床医生间的总体操作者间可靠性非常强。这表明,HEART 评分由不同专业组和不同级别的医生使用时具有可重复性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/68c4/6287564/0226e5b944b1/emermed-2018-207540f01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验