Suppr超能文献

使用两种犬类粪便评分系统进行粪便评分的一致性。

Consistency of faecal scoring using two canine faecal scoring systems.

作者信息

Cavett C L, Tonero M, Marks S L, Winston J A, Gilor C, Rudinsky A J

机构信息

Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine (Cavett, Tonero), College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 61820, USA.

Department of Veterinary Medicine and Epidemiology (Marks), School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, Davis, California, 95616, USA.

出版信息

J Small Anim Pract. 2021 Mar;62(3):167-173. doi: 10.1111/jsap.13283. Epub 2021 Jan 25.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the agreement of canine faecal scoring between individuals with different levels of experience using two available faecal scoring systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Naturally-voided, undisturbed bowel movements from 126 dogs were evaluated by veterinarians (n = 3) and members of the lay public (n = 126) within 15 minutes of defecation. Each participant was provided a copy of the Purina and Waltham faecal scoring charts in order to characterise the faeces. Agreement between veterinarians and lay people was assessed with kappa statistics, Bland-Altman analysis and visualised with Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

Variable levels of consistency were observed in assessing faecal form among individuals with varying degrees of experience. Fair to substantial agreement existed between individual veterinarians scoring the same bowel movement (kappa statistic ranging from 0.40 to 0.77 on the Purina Scale and 0.54 to 0.61 on the Waltham Scale), while the agreement scores between the veterinarian and the lay public was fair (kappa statistic of 0.38 on the Purina Scale and 0.34 on the Waltham Scale). Disagreement in faecal scores occurred more frequently with lay people versus veterinarians.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The consistency of faecal scoring improved based on the level of experience with the highest agreement consistently noted between veterinarians. In all comparisons, there was inconsistency in faecal scoring which might have implications for veterinarians managing diarrhoeic canine patients. Further studies are needed to better investigate how faecal scoring can be optimised for use in clinical and research settings.

摘要

目的

使用两种现有的粪便评分系统,确定不同经验水平的个体之间犬类粪便评分的一致性。

材料与方法

126只犬自然排出、未受干扰的排便在排便后15分钟内由兽医(n = 3)和普通公众成员(n = 126)进行评估。为每位参与者提供一份普瑞纳和皇家宠物食品粪便评分表,以便对粪便进行特征描述。使用kappa统计量、布兰德-奥特曼分析评估兽医和普通公众之间的一致性,并用布兰德-奥特曼图进行可视化展示。

结果

在评估不同经验程度个体的粪便形态时观察到了不同程度的一致性。对同一排便进行评分的个体兽医之间存在中等至高度一致性(在普瑞纳量表上kappa统计量范围为0.40至0.77,在皇家宠物食品量表上为0.54至0.61),而兽医与普通公众之间的一致性评分中等(在普瑞纳量表上kappa统计量为0.38,在皇家宠物食品量表上为0.34)。普通公众与兽医相比,粪便评分的不一致情况更频繁出现。

临床意义

粪便评分的一致性根据经验水平而提高,兽医之间始终具有最高的一致性。在所有比较中,粪便评分存在不一致性,这可能对治疗腹泻犬患者的兽医有影响。需要进一步研究以更好地调查如何优化粪便评分以用于临床和研究环境。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验