Interrater Reliability of APACHE II Scores for Medical-Surgical Intensive Care Patients: A Prospective Blinded Study

Author:

Kho Michelle E.1,McDonald Ellen2,Stratford Paul W.3,Cook Deborah J.4

Affiliation:

1. Michelle E. Kho is a registered physical therapist and a PhD candidate in the Clinical Health Sciences, Health Research Methodology Program, at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

2. Ellen McDonald is a critical care research coordinator at St Joseph’s Health-care, a teaching center for McMaster University.

3. Paul W. Stratford is a professor of physiotherapy in the School of Rehabilitation Sciences and an associate member of the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster University.

4. Deborah J. Cook is a practicing intensivist, clinical trialist, and professor of medicine and clinical epidemiology and biostatistics at McMaster University.

Abstract

Background Despite widespread use of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), its interrater reliability has not been well studied. Objective To determine interrater reliability of APACHE II scores among 1 intensive care nurse and 2 research clerks. Methods In a prospective, blinded, observational study, 3 raters collected APACHE II scores on 37 consecutive patients in a medical-surgical intensive care unit. One research clerk was blinded to the study’s start date to minimize observer bias. The nurse and the other research clerk were blinded to each other’s scores and did not communicate with the first research clerk about the study. The data analyst was blinded to the identity and source of all 3 raters’ scores. Intraclass correlation coefficients and 95% confidence intervals were assessed. Results Mean (standard deviation) APACHE II scores were 21.8 (9.2) for the nurse, 20.4 (7.7) for research clerk 1, and 20.5 (8.1) for research clerk 2. Among the 3 raters, the intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval) was 0.90 (0.84, 0.94) for the APACHE II total score. Within APACHE II score components, the highest reliability was for age (0.98 [0.97, 0.99]), with lower reliabilities for the Chronic Health Index (0.64 [0.50, 0.80]) and the verbal component of the Glasgow Coma Scale (0.40 [0.20, 0.60]). Results were similar between pairs of raters. Conclusions Use of trained nonmedical personnel to collect illness severity scores for clinical, research, and administrative purposes is reasonable. This method could be used to assess reliability of other illness severity scores.

Publisher

AACN Publishing

Subject

Critical Care Nursing,General Medicine

Cited by 27 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3