Interjudge and intrajudge reliabilities in fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (Fees®) using the penetration-aspiration scale:: A replication study
Interjudge and intrajudge reliabilities in fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (Fees®) using the penetration-aspiration scale:: A replication study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00455-002-0073-4
复制
发表时间：
2002-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Colodny, N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Colodny, N
本研究使用吞咽的光纤内窥镜评价（FEES（R））评估渗透-抽吸量表（PAS）的可靠性，使用79名吞咽者和4名法官复制使用视频荧光透视（VFSS）的研究。使用FEES诊断吞咽，这允许两种技术之间的比较。调查结果表明，所有类别的考绩制度都达到了足够的可靠性，无论是在法官内部和法官之间的评估。除量表评分7外，本研究的可靠性高于Rosenbek及其同事的原始研究。数据分析表明，与最初的评分相比，法官在第二次评分上的一致性更高，这表明考绩制度存在一个学习曲线。此外，研究结果表明，FEES在评估渗透性方面比VFSS更可靠。但VFSS在评估各种严重程度的误吸方面更可靠。这两种技术在区分穿刺和抽吸方面同样有效。这项研究发现，当使用PAS时，FEES与VFSS一样可靠。
This study used Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES(R)) to assess the reliability of the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) using 79 swallows and four judges in a replication of a study using videofluoroscopy (VFSS). The swallows were diagnosed using FEES, which allowed for comparison between the two techniques. The findings indicated that all categories of the PAS achieved adequate reliability, both on intrajudge and interjudge assessments. Reliabilities, with the exception of Scale Score 7, were higher in this study than in the original study by Rosenbek and associates. Data analysis indicated that judges were more highly consistent on second ratings compared with their original ratings, indicating a learning curve on the PAS. In addition, findings suggested that the FEES was more reliable on assessing penetration than VFSS.. but that VFSS was more reliable on the assessment of the various severities of aspiration. The two techniques were equally effective in discriminating between penetration and aspiration. This study found that FEES was just as reliable as VFSS when using the PAS.