학술논문
Esophageal manometry: Assessment of interpreter consistency
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Source
Clinical Gastroenterology & Hepatology. Mar 01, 2005 3(3):218-224
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
1542-3565
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS:: METHODS:: RESULTS:: Overall intraobserver agreement was good (κ = .63, P < .0001). There was no difference (P = .9) between the highly and midexperienced interpreters (κ = .61 and .65, respectively). Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of achalasia and normal motility was good (κ = .65 and .56, respectively). However, other manometric diagnoses yielded only fair interobserver agreement (κ = .27). DES, nonspecific/ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and hypo- and hypertensive LES diagnoses showed the least agreement. Poor adherence to established manometric criteria, misinterpretation of intrabolus pressure, and technical inadequacy were the most common sources of inconsistency in interpretations. CONCLUSIONS