Agreement among Healthcare Professionals in Ten European Countries in Diagnosing Case-Vignettes of Surgical-Site Infections

35Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: Although surgical-site infection (SSI) rates are advocated as a major evaluation criterion, the reproducibility of SSI diagnosis is unknown. We assessed agreement in diagnosing SSI among specialists involved in SSI surveillance in Europe. Methods: Twelve case-vignettes based on suspected SSI were submitted to 100 infection-control physicians (ICPs) and 86 surgeons in 10 European countries. Each participant scored eight randomly-assigned case-vignettes on a secure online relational database. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess agreement for SSI diagnosis on a 7-point Likert scale and the kappa coefficient to assess agreement for SSI depth on a three-point scale. Results: Intra-specialty agreement for SSI diagnosis ranged across countries and specialties from 0.00 (95%CI, 0.00-0.35) to 0.65 (0.45-0.82). Inter-specialty agreement varied from 0.04 (0.00-0.62) in to 0.55 (0.37-0.74) in Germany. For all countries pooled, intra-specialty agreement was poor for surgeons (0.24, 0.14-0.42) and good for ICPs (0.41, 0.28-0.61). Reading SSI definitions improved agreement among ICPs (0.57) but not surgeons (0.09). Intra-specialty agreement for SSI depth ranged across countries and specialties from 0.05 (0.00-0.10) to 0.50 (0.45-0.55) and was not improved by reading SSI definition. Conclusion: Among ICPs and surgeons evaluating case-vignettes of suspected SSI, considerable disagreement occurred regarding the diagnosis, with variations across specialties and countries. © 2013 Birgand et al.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Birgand, G., Lepelletier, D., Baron, G., Barrett, S., Breier, A. C., Buke, C., … Lucet, J. C. (2013). Agreement among Healthcare Professionals in Ten European Countries in Diagnosing Case-Vignettes of Surgical-Site Infections. PLoS ONE, 8(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068618

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free