We have located links that may give you full text access.
The clinician effect on "objective" technical components of the electrodiagnostic consultation.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of clinician factors on technical data within an electrodiagnostic consultation for low-back pain and spinal stenosis.
DESIGN: Examiner differences on single-segment paraspinal mapping scores and other findings were examined in a prospective, masked, double-controlled trial involving 150 people aged 55-80 yrs who were selected for no symptoms, back pain, or possible spinal stenosis.
RESULTS: Unmasked clinicians were more variable than masked physicians (F2,219 = 4.808, P =or<0.01) and gave lower scores to people they felt had mechanical back pain. The percentage of inadequate segmental scores differed among clinicians (0-16.6%, F8,226 = 4.170, P < 0.001), with fellows having more difficulty than faculty (11.76 +/- 32.38% vs. 0.75 +/- 8.67%) (t233 = 3.753, P < 0.001). Correction of clinician bias improved the relationship between paraspinal score and subjects' ability to walk (weighted regression R = 0.129, B = -0.047, P < 0.001; unweighted regression R = 0.090, B = -0.045, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Objective testing is adversely affected by clinician factors including prejudgment, experience, and individual idiosyncrasies. Less variation is found in more codified procedures. For electrodiagnostic consultation, correction of variability improves the relationship of test results to disability.
DESIGN: Examiner differences on single-segment paraspinal mapping scores and other findings were examined in a prospective, masked, double-controlled trial involving 150 people aged 55-80 yrs who were selected for no symptoms, back pain, or possible spinal stenosis.
RESULTS: Unmasked clinicians were more variable than masked physicians (F2,219 = 4.808, P =or<0.01) and gave lower scores to people they felt had mechanical back pain. The percentage of inadequate segmental scores differed among clinicians (0-16.6%, F8,226 = 4.170, P < 0.001), with fellows having more difficulty than faculty (11.76 +/- 32.38% vs. 0.75 +/- 8.67%) (t233 = 3.753, P < 0.001). Correction of clinician bias improved the relationship between paraspinal score and subjects' ability to walk (weighted regression R = 0.129, B = -0.047, P < 0.001; unweighted regression R = 0.090, B = -0.045, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Objective testing is adversely affected by clinician factors including prejudgment, experience, and individual idiosyncrasies. Less variation is found in more codified procedures. For electrodiagnostic consultation, correction of variability improves the relationship of test results to disability.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app