Reliability and validity of lumbosacral spine radiograph reading by chiropractors, chiropractic radiologists, and medical radiologists

被引:6
作者
de Zoete, A
Assendelft, WJJ
Algra, PR
Oberman, WB
Vanderschueren, GMJM
Bezemer, PD
机构
[1] Med Centrum Alkmaar, Dept Radiol, NL-1800 AM Alkmaar, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Gen Practice, Div Publ Hlth, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Leiden, Netherlands
[4] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
chiropractic; conventional radiography; infection; inflammation; metastases; observer performance; skeletal-axial; spine;
D O I
10.1097/00007632-200209010-00021
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. A cross-sectional diagnostic study was conducted,in two sessions. Objective. To determine and compare the reliability and validity of contra indications to chiropractic treatment (infections, malignancies, inflammatory spondylitis, and spondylolysis-listhesis) detected by chiropractors, chiropractic. radiologists, and medical radiologists on plain lumbosacral radiographs. Summary of Background Data. Plain radiography of the spine is an established part of chiropractic practice. Few studies have assessed the ability of chiropractors to read plain radiographs. Methods. Five chiropractors, three chiropractic radiologists and five medical radiologists read a set of 300 blinded lumbosacral radiographs, 50 of which showed an abnormality (prevalence, 16.7%), in two sessions. The results were expressed in terms of reliability (percentage and kappa) and validity (sensitivity and specificity). Results. The interobserver agreement in the first session showed generalized kappas of 0.44 for the chiropractors, 0.55 for the chiropractic radiologists, and 0.60 for the medical radiologists. The intraobserver agreement showed mean kappas of 0.58, 0.68, and 0.72, respectively. The difference between the chiropractic radiologists and medical radiologists was not significant. However, there was a difference between the chiropractors and the other professional groups. The mean sensitivity and specificity of the first round, respectively was 0.86 and 0.88 for the chiropractors, 0.90 and 0.84 for the chiropractic radiologists, and 0.84 and 0.92 for the medical radiologists. No differences in the sensitivities were found between the professional groups. The medical radiologists were more specific than the others. Conclusions. Small differences with little clinical relevance were found. All the professional groups adequately detect contraindications to chiropractic treatment on radiographs. For this indication, there is no reason to restrict interpretation of radiographs to medical radiologists. Good professional relationships between the professions are recommended to facilitate interprofessional consultation in case of doubt by the chiropractors.
引用
收藏
页码:1926 / 1933
页数:8
相关论文
共 40 条
[11]  
2-N
[12]   THE OUTCOMES AND COSTS OF CARE FOR ACUTE LOW-BACK-PAIN AMONG PATIENTS SEEN BY PRIMARY-CARE PRACTITIONERS, CHIROPRACTORS, AND ORTHOPEDIC SURGEONS [J].
CAREY, TS ;
GARRETT, J ;
JACKMAN, A ;
MCLAUGHLIN, C ;
FRYER, J ;
SMUCKER, DR ;
CURTIS, P ;
DARTER, J ;
DEFRIESE, G ;
EVANS, A ;
HADLER, N ;
HUNTER, G ;
JOINES, J ;
KALSBEEK, W ;
KONRAD, T ;
MCNUTT, R ;
RICKETTS, T ;
TAYLOR, D .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1995, 333 (14) :913-917
[13]   RELIABILITY OF INTERPRETATION OF PLAIN LUMBAR SPINE RADIOGRAPHS IN BENIGN, MECHANICAL LOW-BACK-PAIN [J].
COSTE, J ;
PAOLAGGI, JB ;
SPIRA, A .
SPINE, 1991, 16 (04) :426-428
[14]   DETECTION OF SIGNIFICANT ABNORMALITIES ON LUMBAR SPINE RADIOGRAPHS [J].
DAVIES, AM ;
FOWLER, J ;
TYRRELL, PNM ;
MILLAR, JS ;
LEAHY, JF ;
PATEL, K ;
HILL, JS .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1993, 66 (781) :37-43
[15]   LUMBAR SPINE FILMS IN PRIMARY CARE - CURRENT USE AND EFFECTS OF SELECTIVE ORDERING CRITERIA [J].
DEYO, RA ;
DIEHL, AK .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1986, 1 (01) :20-25
[16]  
DEYO RA, 1994, SPINE, V19, pS2057
[17]   OBSERVER VARIABILITY IN THE INTERPRETATION OF LUMBAR SPINE RADIOGRAPHS [J].
DEYO, RA ;
MCNIESH, LM ;
CONE, RO .
ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 1985, 28 (09) :1066-1070
[18]   Context bias - A problem in diagnostic radiology [J].
Egglin, TKP ;
Feinstein, AR .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 276 (21) :1752-1755
[19]   Observer variation in plain radiography of the lumbosacral spine [J].
Espeland, A ;
Korsbrekke, K ;
Albrektsen, G ;
Larsen, JL .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1998, 71 (844) :366-375
[20]   HIGH AGREEMENT BUT LOW KAPPA .1. THE PROBLEMS OF 2 PARADOXES [J].
FEINSTEIN, AR ;
CICCHETTI, DV .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1990, 43 (06) :543-549