PulStar differential compliance spinal instrument: A randomized interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability study
PulStar differential compliance spinal instrument: A randomized interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0161-4754(03)00106-4
复制
发表时间：
2003-10-01
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Veal, PS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Leach, RA;Parker, PL;Veal, PS
目的：为PulStar计算机辅助微分顺应性脊柱器械提供一种入门级的新技术可靠性评估。被试：通过公告和个人接触的方式招募18名大学生（男9名，女9名）。方法：经密西西比州立大学机构审查委员会批准同意程序后，对PulStar功能记录和分析系统（PulStarFRAS）设备的临床可靠性进行评估。两个考官。从数据收集中失明，对随机顺序的个体受试者（俯卧，背部暴露）使用该仪器来管理光脉冲(与。9 J（产生3- 4磅的力）在整个颈椎、脊柱背和腰椎的每个节段水平上使用间隔3厘米的探头，跨在棘突上，同时计算机记录结果（阻力在0到25.5磅力的范围内）。采用探索性数据分析（EDA）、方差分析（ANOVA）检验和类内相关系数（ICC）对数据进行分析。此外，进行了平均检验（ANOVA），以确定是否由于反复的光照射脊柱而出现变化趋势，独立于不同检查人员解释的方差。结果：经EDA分析和方差分析，2名从业人员的内测信度很高，但不完全可靠。ICC统计数据证实了这一点，表明两名从业人员的可靠性都很好（经验丰富的从业人员为0.89，新培训的从业人员为0.78）。基于EDA/ANOVA分析，PulStar的Interexaminer信度同样非常高，但并不完美，从良好到优秀（ICC = 0.87）。结论：PulStar机械调节装置设置为分析模式，无论是由经验丰富的检验员还是新手（但经过培训）检验员使用，都具有良好到极好的可靠性。此外，作为抗轻推力或脊柱顺应性的衡量标准，两位使用PulStar仪器的医生的可靠性同样从好到好。
Objective: To provide an entry-level, new technology reliability assessment of the PulStar computer-assisted, differential compliance spinal instrument.Subjects: Eighteen college students (9 male and 9 female) were recruited by announcements and personal contacts.Methods: Following approval of the consent process by the Institutional Review Board of Mississippi State University, a PulStar Function Recording and Analysis System (PulStarFRAS) device was evaluated for clinical reliabilitv. Two examiners. blinded from data collection, used the instrument on individual subjects in random order (lying prone with their backs exposed) to administer light impulses (congruent to .9 J which produced a 3- to 4-lb force) at each segmental level throughout the cervical, dorsal, and lumbar spine using probe tips spaced 3 cm apart, straddling the spinous processes, while a computer recorded the findings (resistance on a scale of 0 to 25.5 lb force). Data were analyzed by Exploratory Data Analysis (EDA) with analysis of variance (ANOVA) testing and by use of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In addition, a mean test (ANOVA) was conducted to determine if a trend in variation occurred as a result of repeated light thrusts to the spine, independent of variance explained by different examiners.Results: Using EDA analysis and ANOVA, intraexaminer reliability for the 2 practitioners was very high but not perfect. This was confirmed by ICC statistics demonstrating good to excellent reliability for both practitioners (0.89 for the experienced practitioner, 0.78 for the newly trained practitioner). Interexaminer reliability of PulStar was similarly very high but not perfect based on EDA/ANOVA analysis and good to excellent (ICC = 0.87).Conclusion: The PulStar mechanical adjusting device set to analysis mode appears to have good to excellent reliability when used by either an experienced or a novice (but trained) examiner. In addition, as a measure for resistance to a light thrust or spinal compliance, reliability was similarly good to excellent between the 2 doctors using the PulStar instrument.