Multi-institutional Validation of the Interarytenoid Assessment Protocol for Pediatric Laryngeal Cleft.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Laryngoscope Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1002/lary.31866
Jennifer M Siu, Shaunak Amin, Evan J Propst, Nikolaus E Wolter, Jeremy Prager, Michelle Wyatt, Claire Lawlor, Douglas Sidell, Deepak Mehta, Reema Padia, Nicholas Smith, Christopher Hartnick, Catherine K Hart, Xing Wang, Kaalan Johnson
{"title":"Multi-institutional Validation of the Interarytenoid Assessment Protocol for Pediatric Laryngeal Cleft.","authors":"Jennifer M Siu, Shaunak Amin, Evan J Propst, Nikolaus E Wolter, Jeremy Prager, Michelle Wyatt, Claire Lawlor, Douglas Sidell, Deepak Mehta, Reema Padia, Nicholas Smith, Christopher Hartnick, Catherine K Hart, Xing Wang, Kaalan Johnson","doi":"10.1002/lary.31866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Current assessment techniques for determining whether a patient has normal interarytenoid anatomy, a deep interarytenoid notch, or a minor laryngeal cleft are highly variable. However, differentiating between these three entities is important, given it may distinguish whether a patient should be considered for surgical intervention. The Interarytenoid Assessment Protocol (IAAP) was developed to provide standardization of interarytenoid anatomy evaluations. We aimed to assess the reliability of the IAAP for assessment of interaytenoid mucosal height (IAMH) through a multi-institutional validation study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Reliability of the IAAP was assessed by 10 pediatric otolaryngologists all from different academic centers. 30 de-identified endoscopic videos of interarytenoid assessments were rated at two separate time points, 2 months apart. Intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficients with two-way models were used to evaluate inter- and intra-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty endoscopic videos were collected for patients with a median (IQR) age of 4.9 years (59 months; range: 1 month to 20 years). On the first video assessment, inter-rater reliability was 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.84), and on the second video assessment, inter-rater reliability was 0.75 (95% CI 0.63-0.85) indicating strong inter-rater reliability. Overall intra-rater test-retest reliability was 0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.79) indicating strong agreement. In almost half, 14 (46.6%) raters chose IAAP classification levels within 1 level of each other.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multi-institutional validation of the IAAP demonstrates strong inter- and intra-rater reliability for assessment of IAMH when evaluated through pictorial analysis. Standardization of anatomical evaluations may improve our ability to perform more reliable outcomes studies of pediatric pharyngeal dysphagia in the future.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>NA Laryngoscope, 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":49921,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.31866","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Current assessment techniques for determining whether a patient has normal interarytenoid anatomy, a deep interarytenoid notch, or a minor laryngeal cleft are highly variable. However, differentiating between these three entities is important, given it may distinguish whether a patient should be considered for surgical intervention. The Interarytenoid Assessment Protocol (IAAP) was developed to provide standardization of interarytenoid anatomy evaluations. We aimed to assess the reliability of the IAAP for assessment of interaytenoid mucosal height (IAMH) through a multi-institutional validation study.

Methods: Reliability of the IAAP was assessed by 10 pediatric otolaryngologists all from different academic centers. 30 de-identified endoscopic videos of interarytenoid assessments were rated at two separate time points, 2 months apart. Intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficients with two-way models were used to evaluate inter- and intra-rater reliability.

Results: Thirty endoscopic videos were collected for patients with a median (IQR) age of 4.9 years (59 months; range: 1 month to 20 years). On the first video assessment, inter-rater reliability was 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.84), and on the second video assessment, inter-rater reliability was 0.75 (95% CI 0.63-0.85) indicating strong inter-rater reliability. Overall intra-rater test-retest reliability was 0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.79) indicating strong agreement. In almost half, 14 (46.6%) raters chose IAAP classification levels within 1 level of each other.

Conclusions: Multi-institutional validation of the IAAP demonstrates strong inter- and intra-rater reliability for assessment of IAMH when evaluated through pictorial analysis. Standardization of anatomical evaluations may improve our ability to perform more reliable outcomes studies of pediatric pharyngeal dysphagia in the future.

Level of evidence: NA Laryngoscope, 2024.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多机构验证小儿喉裂的齿间音评估方案
背景:目前用于确定患者是正常喉间解剖结构、深喉间切迹还是轻微喉裂的评估技术存在很大差异。但是,区分这三种情况非常重要,因为这可以区分患者是否应考虑手术治疗。喉间解剖学评估规程(IAAP)的制定是为了使喉间解剖学评估标准化。我们的目的是通过一项多机构验证研究来评估 IAAP 用于评估蝶窦间粘膜高度(IAMH)的可靠性:方法:来自不同学术中心的 10 位儿科耳鼻喉科专家对 IAAP 的可靠性进行了评估。在两个不同的时间点(相隔 2 个月)对 30 个去标识化的内窥镜视频进行了咽鼓管间隙评估。使用双向模型的类内相关(ICC)系数来评估评分者之间和评分者内部的可靠性:为中位(IQR)年龄为 4.9 岁(59 个月;范围:1 个月至 20 岁)的患者收集了 30 个内窥镜视频。第一次视频评估的评分者间可靠性为 0.74(95% CI 0.63-0.84),第二次视频评估的评分者间可靠性为 0.75(95% CI 0.63-0.85),表明评分者间可靠性很高。评分者内部测试-重复测试的总体可靠性为 0.75(95% CI 0.69-0.79),表明一致性很高。14名评分员(46.6%)选择的IAAP分类级别相差不到1级,几乎占了半数:IAAP的多机构验证表明,通过图像分析评估IAMH时,评分者之间和评分者内部的可靠性都很高。解剖学评估的标准化可提高我们今后对小儿咽部吞咽困难进行更可靠的结果研究的能力:NA 《喉镜》,2024 年。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Laryngoscope
Laryngoscope 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
500
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The Laryngoscope has been the leading source of information on advances in the diagnosis and treatment of head and neck disorders since 1890. The Laryngoscope is the first choice among otolaryngologists for publication of their important findings and techniques. Each monthly issue of The Laryngoscope features peer-reviewed medical, clinical, and research contributions in general otolaryngology, allergy/rhinology, otology/neurotology, laryngology/bronchoesophagology, head and neck surgery, sleep medicine, pediatric otolaryngology, facial plastics and reconstructive surgery, oncology, and communicative disorders. Contributions include papers and posters presented at the Annual and Section Meetings of the Triological Society, as well as independent papers, "How I Do It", "Triological Best Practice" articles, and contemporary reviews. Theses authored by the Triological Society’s new Fellows as well as papers presented at meetings of the American Laryngological Association are published in The Laryngoscope. • Broncho-esophagology • Communicative disorders • Head and neck surgery • Plastic and reconstructive facial surgery • Oncology • Speech and hearing defects
期刊最新文献
Otolaryngologists Demonstrate Low Agreement on Pediatric Airway Inflammation Assessment. A Predictive Model for Oral Intake Independence in Dysphagia Treatment. Classifications of Postradiation Nasopharyngeal Necrosis for Guiding Transnasal Endoscopic Nasopharyngeal Skull Base Surgery. Clinical Phenotypic Characterization of the SLC26A4 Mutation in Pendred Syndrome/Nonsyndromic Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct. Scala Tympani Volume Influences Initial 6-Month Hearing Preservation With Lateral Wall Electrode Arrays.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1