Validation of subjective rating scales for assessment of surgical workspace during laparoscopy
Background Recently, studies have focused on how to optimize laparoscopic surgical workspace by changes in intra‐abdominal pressure, level of muscle relaxation or body position, typically evaluated by surgeons using subjective rating scales. We aimed to validate two rating scales by having surgeons...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Vol. 61; no. 10; pp. 1270 - 1277 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
England
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
01-11-2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background
Recently, studies have focused on how to optimize laparoscopic surgical workspace by changes in intra‐abdominal pressure, level of muscle relaxation or body position, typically evaluated by surgeons using subjective rating scales. We aimed to validate two rating scales by having surgeons assess surgical workspace in video sequences recorded during laparoscopic surgery.
Method
Video sequences were obtained from laparoscopic procedures. Eight experienced surgeons assessed the video sequences on a categorical 5‐point scale and a numerical 10‐point rating scale. Intraclass correlations coefficients (ICC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for intra‐ and inter‐rater reliability.
Results
The 5‐point rating scale had an intra‐rater ICC of 0.76 (0.69; 0.83) and an inter‐rater ICC of 0.57 (0.45; 0.68), corresponding to excellent and fair reliability, respectively. The 10‐point scale had an intra‐rater ICC of 0.86 (0.82; 0.89) and an inter‐rater ICC of 0.54 (0.39; 0.68), corresponding to excellent and fair as well. All surgeons used the full range of the 5‐point scale, but only one surgeon used the full range of the 10‐point scale.
Conclusion
In conclusion, both scales showed excellent intra‐rater and fair inter‐rater reliability for assessing surgical workspace in laparoscopy. The 5‐point surgical rating scale had all categories employed by all surgeons. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02545270?term=NCT02545270&rank=1 The study was supported in part by a research grant from Investigator‐Initiated Studies Program of MSD. The opinions expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of MSD. Clinical Trial Registration Conflict of Interest Dr. Nervil reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp during the conduct of the study. Dr. Medici reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp during the conduct of the study and grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp outside the submitted work. Dr. Thomsen reports grants from Merck Sharpe and Dohme outside the submitted work. Dr. Staehr‐Rye reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp during the conduct of the study. Dr. Asadzadeh has nothing to disclose. Dr. Rosenberg reports personal fees from Merck and grants and personal fees from Bard outside the submitted work. Dr. Gätke reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp during the conduct of the study. Dr. Vested Madsen reports grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp during the conduct of the study and grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp outside the submitted work. Funding ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| ISSN: | 0001-5172 1399-6576 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/aas.13001 |