Assessing the Quality of Vascular Ultrasound Examinations Using the IAC QI Self-Assessment Tool: Inter-Rater and Intra-Rater Agreement Between Vascular Technologists and Interpreting Physicians

Author:

Bajwa Bakhtawar N.1ORCID,Esterson Yonah B.1,Naidich James B.1,Burke Brian J.1,D’Agostino Catherine A.1,Kline Myriam2,Pellerito John S.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Radiology, Northwell Health System, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, NY, USA

2. Department of Biostatistics, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY, USA

Abstract

Introduction: Vascular laboratories need to improve efficiency while maintaining examination quality. Vascular ultrasound examinations were retrospectively evaluated using the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) Quality Improvement (QI) Self-Assessment Tool to evaluate the quality of the examinations and to determine inter-rater and intra-rater agreement between groups of vascular technologists and interpreting physicians. Methods: Vascular technologists and attending interpreting physicians evaluated 100 carotid Doppler and 100 lower extremity venous Doppler examinations utilizing the IAC QI Self-Assessment Tool. Gwet’s First-Order Agreement Coefficient (AC1) statistic and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine both inter-rater and intra-rater agreement. Results: The inter-rater agreement for 91% of all questions ranged from substantial (AC1 = 0.6) to almost perfect (AC1 = 1) for both examination types across all reviewers. Agreement on 2 questions was suboptimal: specifically, the technical quality section for the vascular technologists showed slight agreement for carotid Doppler and venous Doppler examinations (AC1 = 0.108 and 0.087, respectively), and the case review section for the interpreting physicians showed poor agreement for carotid Doppler examinations (AC1 = –0.087) and fair agreement for venous Doppler examinations (AC1 = 0.329). The intra-rater agreement among the interpreting physicians for both examinations was in the almost perfect range (Carotid AC1 = 0.875-1; Venous AC1 = 0.871-1). The intra-rater agreement among the vascular technologists for both examinations ranged from slight to almost perfect (Carotid AC1 = 0.191-1; Venous AC1 = 0.155-1). Conclusion: Substantial to almost perfect agreement among all reviewers was observed for most of the quality review questions. The IAC QI Self-Assessment Tool aided in identifying areas for improvement in vascular studies and the comments captured in the technical quality section of the tool were instrumental in establishing areas for quality improvement.

Funder

Intersocietal Accreditation Committee

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging

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