A trial of proficiency of nerve conduction: Greater standardization still needed
ABSTRACT Introduction The aim of this study was to test the proficiency (accuracy among evaluators) of measured attributes of nerve conduction (NC). Methods Expert clinical neurophysiologists, without instruction or consensus development, from 4 different medical centers, independently assessed 8 at...
Saved in:
Published in | Muscle & nerve Vol. 48; no. 3; pp. 369 - 374 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01.09.2013
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | ABSTRACT
Introduction
The aim of this study was to test the proficiency (accuracy among evaluators) of measured attributes of nerve conduction (NC).
Methods
Expert clinical neurophysiologists, without instruction or consensus development, from 4 different medical centers, independently assessed 8 attributes of NC in 24 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) on consecutive days.
Results
No significant intraobserver differences between days 1 and 2 were found, but significant interobserver differences were seen. Use of standard reference values did not correct for these observed differences.
Conclusions
Interobserver variability was attributed to differences in performance of NC. It was of sufficient magnitude that it is of concern for the conduct of therapeutic trials. To deal with interrater variability in therapeutic trials, the same electromyographers should perform all NC assessments of individual patients or, preferably, NC procedures should be more standardized. A further trial is needed to test whether such standardization would eliminate interobserver variability. Muscle Nerve 48: 369–374, 2013 |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ark:/67375/WNG-MTK69H9C-G istex:EE9FA910BDC68A07556657A8D57685811AA3D706 ArticleID:MUS23765 The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. This article includes Supplementary Material available via the internet at This study was supported by Mayo Foundation funds with grants obtained from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS36797 to P.J.D.), and by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health (R01AGO34676). Disclosure http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/suppmat/0148‐639X/suppmat/ ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1 |
ISSN: | 0148-639X 1097-4598 |
DOI: | 10.1002/mus.23765 |