Department of Surgery and Orthopedics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Surgery and Orthopedics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2023 Jul;11(4):708-715. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.03.010. Epub 2023 Apr 6.
The evaluation of sclerotherapy efficacy for lower limb telangiectasias, which is the standard treatment for such condition, is commonly assisted by scores based on before and after pictures. This method is marked by its subjectivity, which impairs the precision of studies on the subject, making it unfeasible to evaluate and compare different interventions. We hypothesize that a quantitative method for evaluating the effectiveness of sclerotherapy for lower limb telangiectasias may present more reproducible results. Reliable measurement methods and new technologies may become part of the clinical practice in the near future.
Before and after treatment photographs were analyzed using a quantitative method and compared with a validated qualitative method based on improvement scores. Reliability analysis of the methods was performed, applying the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa coefficient with quadratic weights (Fleiss Cohen), for analysis of inter-examiner and intra-examiner agreement in both evaluation methods. Convergent validity was evaluated by applying the Spearman test. To assess the applicability of the quantitative scale, the Mann-Whitney test was used.
A better agreement between examiners is shown for the quantitative scale, with a mean kappa of .3986 (.251-.511) for qualitative analysis and a mean kappa of .788 (.655-.918) for quantitative analysis (P < .001 for all examiners). Convergent validity was achieved by correlation coefficients of .572 to .905 (P < .001). The quantitative scale results obtained between the specialists with different degrees of experience did not show statistical difference (seniors: 0.71 [-0.48/1.00] × juniors: 0.73 [-0.34/1.00]; P = .221).
Convergent validity between both analyses has been achieved, but quantitative analysis has been shown to be more reliable and can be applied by professionals of any degree of experience. The validation of quantitative analysis is a major milestone for the development of new technology and automated, reliable, applications.
硬化疗法是下肢毛细血管扩张症的标准治疗方法,其疗效评估通常借助于治疗前后的照片评分来辅助。这种方法的主观性很强,这会降低该主题研究的准确性,使得评估和比较不同干预措施变得不可行。我们假设,一种用于评估下肢毛细血管扩张症硬化疗法效果的定量方法可能会提供更具可重复性的结果。可靠的测量方法和新技术可能在不久的将来成为临床实践的一部分。
使用定量方法分析治疗前后的照片,并将其与基于改善评分的验证性定性方法进行比较。对两种评估方法的方法进行可靠性分析,应用组内相关系数(ICC)和二次加权(Fleiss Cohen)kappa 系数,分析两种评估方法的检查者间和检查者内一致性。应用 Spearman 检验评估收敛有效性。为了评估定量量表的适用性,使用了 Mann-Whitney 检验。
定量量表显示出更好的检查者间一致性,定性分析的平均 kappa 值为.3986(.251-511),定量分析的平均 kappa 值为.788(.655-918)(所有检查者的 P 值均<.001)。相关性系数为.572 至.905(P<.001),达到了收敛有效性。具有不同经验程度的专家之间的定量量表结果没有显示出统计学差异(高级别专家:0.71[-0.48/1.00]×低级别专家:0.73[-0.34/1.00];P=.221)。
两种分析之间已经达到了收敛有效性,但定量分析显示出更高的可靠性,并且可以由任何经验水平的专业人员应用。定量分析的验证是开发新技术和自动化、可靠应用的重要里程碑。