Suppr超能文献

重新评估根据 STOPP/START 标准进行药物治疗评估的观察者间可靠性。

Revisiting the inter-rater reliability of drug treatment assessments according to the STOPP/START criteria.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Närhälsan Kungshöjd Health Centre, Gothenburg, Sweden.

出版信息

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2023 Feb;89(2):832-842. doi: 10.1111/bcp.15530. Epub 2022 Oct 5.

Abstract

AIMS

The aim of this study is to revisit the inter-rater reliability of drug treatment assessments according to the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria.

METHODS

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) were independently identified by two physicians in two cohorts of older people (I: 200 hip fracture patients, median age 85 years, STOPP/START version 1; II: 302 primary care patients, median age 74 years, STOPP/START version 2). Kappa statistics were used to evaluate inter-rater agreement.

RESULTS

In cohort I, a total of 782 PIMs/PPOs, related to 68 (78%) out of 87 criteria, were identified by at least one assessor, 500 (64%) of which were discordantly identified by the assessors, that is, by one assessor but not the other. For four STOPP criteria, all PIMs (n = 9) were concordantly identified. In cohort II, 955 PIMs/PPOs, related to 80 (70%) out of 114 criteria, were identified, 614 (64%) of which were discordantly identified. For three STOPP criteria, all PIMs (n = 3) were concordantly identified. For no START criterion, with ≥1 PPO identified, were all assessments concordant. The kappa value for PIM/PPO identification was 0.52 in both cohorts. In cohort II, the kappa was 0.37 when criteria regarding influenza and pneumococcal vaccines were excluded. Further analysis of discordantly identified PIMs/PPOs revealed methodological aspects of importance, including the data source used and criteria wording.

CONCLUSIONS

When the STOPP/START criteria are applied in PIM/PPO research, reliability seems to be an issue not encountered in previous reliability studies.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在根据老年人用药评估筛查工具(STOPP)/恰当用药筛查工具(START)标准,重新评估药物治疗评估的组间可靠性。

方法

两名医生在两个老年患者队列(I:200 例髋部骨折患者,中位年龄 85 岁,使用 STOPP/START 版本 1;II:302 例初级保健患者,中位年龄 74 岁,使用 STOPP/START 版本 2)中独立识别潜在不适当药物(PIM)和潜在用药遗漏(PPO)。采用 Kappa 统计量评估组间一致性。

结果

在队列 I 中,至少有一名评估者识别出了 782 种 PIM/PPO,涉及 68 项(78%)标准中的 87 项,其中 500 项(64%)被评估者不一致地识别出来,即一名评估者识别而另一名未识别。对于四个 STOPP 标准,所有 PIM(n=9)均被一致识别。在队列 II 中,识别出了 955 种 PIM/PPO,涉及 80 项(70%)标准中的 114 项,其中 614 项(64%)被不一致地识别。对于三个 STOPP 标准,所有 PIM(n=3)均被一致识别。对于没有一个 START 标准,只要有≥1 个 PPO 被识别,所有评估都是一致的。两个队列中 PIM/PPO 识别的 Kappa 值均为 0.52。当排除与流感和肺炎球菌疫苗相关的标准时,队列 II 中的 Kappa 值为 0.37。进一步分析不一致识别的 PIM/PPO 显示了重要的方法学方面,包括使用的数据来源和标准措辞。

结论

当 STOPP/START 标准应用于 PIM/PPO 研究时,可靠性似乎是之前可靠性研究中未遇到的问题。

相似文献

7
Clinical relevance of the STOPP/START criteria in hip fracture patients.STOPP/START标准在髋部骨折患者中的临床相关性。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Apr;73(4):499-505. doi: 10.1007/s00228-016-2188-9. Epub 2017 Jan 3.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

9
Clinical relevance of the STOPP/START criteria in hip fracture patients.STOPP/START标准在髋部骨折患者中的临床相关性。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Apr;73(4):499-505. doi: 10.1007/s00228-016-2188-9. Epub 2017 Jan 3.

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