Interobserver agreement between non-cardiologist veterinarians and a cardiologist after a 6-hour training course for echographic evaluation of basic echocardiographic parameters and caudal vena cava diameter in 15 healthy Beagles.

Elodie Darnis, A. Merveille, L. Desquilbet, S. Boysen, K. Gommeren
{"title":"Interobserver agreement between non-cardiologist veterinarians and a cardiologist after a 6-hour training course for echographic evaluation of basic echocardiographic parameters and caudal vena cava diameter in 15 healthy Beagles.","authors":"Elodie Darnis, A. Merveille, L. Desquilbet, S. Boysen, K. Gommeren","doi":"10.1111/vec.12883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo evaluate cardiovascular focused assessment with sonography for trauma and triage (CV-FAST) interobserver agreement for echocardiographic parameters and caudal vena cava (CVC) diameter measurement, between a cardiologist and 2 non-cardiologists after a 6-hour training course.\n\n\nSETTING\nUniversity veterinary teaching hospital.\n\n\nANIMALS\nFifteen healthy Beagle dogs.\n\n\nINTERVENTIONS\nNone.\n\n\nMEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS\nEchocardiography parameters were assessed via standardized views. Caudal vena cava was assessed via a subxiphoid window (CVC-SubX) using 3 measurements (minimal and maximal CVC diameter, and collapsibility index) and via a dorsolateral window (CVC-DL) using 1 measurement (CVC diameter). Bland-Altman analysis assessed agreement of each non-cardiologist with the cardiologist; coefficients of variation (CoV) quantified variability between observers. The 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and CoVs were considered acceptable for left atrial diameter, left atrium to aortic ratio, normalized left ventricle diameter in diastole and systole but non-acceptable for fractional shortening and pulmonary vein to pulmonary artery ratio. For CVC-SubX, the 95% LOA for maximum CVC diameter were acceptable, while minimum CVC diameter and CVC collapsibility index were non-acceptable. The CoVs were good for maximum and minimum CVC (7%) and poor for collapsibility index (37%). For CVC-DL, the 95% LOA were non-acceptable, although the CoV was considered good (11%).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nA 6-hour training course in echocardiography allows non-cardiologists to assess left atrial diameter, left atrium to aortic ratio, normalized left ventricle diameter in diastole and systole, and CVCmax of the CV-FAST exam in healthy Beagles. Standardization of the CVC-SubX technique and assessment of the impact of the respiratory phase on CVC diameter in dogs is needed. Further studies are required to determine whether interobserver agreement remains acceptable when including different breeds. Assessment of basic echocardiographic parameters and the CVC to estimate volume status in small animal medicine merits further clinical evaluation.","PeriodicalId":74015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/vec.12883","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate cardiovascular focused assessment with sonography for trauma and triage (CV-FAST) interobserver agreement for echocardiographic parameters and caudal vena cava (CVC) diameter measurement, between a cardiologist and 2 non-cardiologists after a 6-hour training course. SETTING University veterinary teaching hospital. ANIMALS Fifteen healthy Beagle dogs. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Echocardiography parameters were assessed via standardized views. Caudal vena cava was assessed via a subxiphoid window (CVC-SubX) using 3 measurements (minimal and maximal CVC diameter, and collapsibility index) and via a dorsolateral window (CVC-DL) using 1 measurement (CVC diameter). Bland-Altman analysis assessed agreement of each non-cardiologist with the cardiologist; coefficients of variation (CoV) quantified variability between observers. The 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and CoVs were considered acceptable for left atrial diameter, left atrium to aortic ratio, normalized left ventricle diameter in diastole and systole but non-acceptable for fractional shortening and pulmonary vein to pulmonary artery ratio. For CVC-SubX, the 95% LOA for maximum CVC diameter were acceptable, while minimum CVC diameter and CVC collapsibility index were non-acceptable. The CoVs were good for maximum and minimum CVC (7%) and poor for collapsibility index (37%). For CVC-DL, the 95% LOA were non-acceptable, although the CoV was considered good (11%). CONCLUSIONS A 6-hour training course in echocardiography allows non-cardiologists to assess left atrial diameter, left atrium to aortic ratio, normalized left ventricle diameter in diastole and systole, and CVCmax of the CV-FAST exam in healthy Beagles. Standardization of the CVC-SubX technique and assessment of the impact of the respiratory phase on CVC diameter in dogs is needed. Further studies are required to determine whether interobserver agreement remains acceptable when including different breeds. Assessment of basic echocardiographic parameters and the CVC to estimate volume status in small animal medicine merits further clinical evaluation.
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
非心脏病专家兽医和心脏病专家在对15只健康比格犬的基本超声心动图参数和尾腔静脉直径进行6小时的超声心动图评估培训后达成的观察者间协议。
目的评估一名心脏病专家和两名非心脏病专家在6小时的培训课程后,用超声心动图对创伤和分诊(CV-FAST)进行心血管重点评估,观察者之间对超声心动图参数和尾腔静脉(CVC)直径测量的一致性。SETTING大学兽医教学医院。动物饲养健康的比格犬。干预无。测量和主要结果心电图参数通过标准化视图进行评估。通过剑突下窗(CVC SubX)使用3个测量值(最小和最大CVC直径和塌陷指数)评估尾腔静脉,并通过背外侧窗(CVC-DL)使用1个测量值评估尾腔直径。Bland-Altman分析评估了每个非心脏病专家和心脏病专家的一致性;变异系数(CoV)量化了观察者之间的变异性。95%的一致性限度(LOA)和CoVs被认为是左心房直径、左心房与主动脉比率、舒张期和收缩期的标准化左心室直径可接受的,但对于缩短部分和肺静脉与肺动脉比率不可接受。对于CVC SubX,最大CVC直径的95%LOA是可接受的,而最小CVC直径和CVC溃散指数是不可接受的。CoV的最大和最小CVC良好(7%),溃散指数较差(37%)。对于CVC-DL,95%的LOA是不可接受的,尽管CoV被认为是好的(11%)。结论6小时的超声心动图培训课程使非心脏病专家能够评估健康比格犬的左心房直径、左心房与主动脉比率、舒张期和收缩期的标准化左心室直径以及CV-FAST检查的CVCmax。需要对CVC SubX技术进行标准化,并评估呼吸阶段对犬CVC直径的影响。需要进一步的研究来确定在包括不同品种时,观察者之间的一致性是否仍然可以接受。评估基本超声心动图参数和CVC以评估小动物医学中的体积状态值得进一步的临床评估。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Owner experiences with and perceptions of owner-witnessed CPR in veterinary medicine. Development and implementation of a hemovigilance program at a university veterinary teaching hospital. 2022 Update of the Consensus on the Rational Use of Antithrombotics and Thrombolytics in Veterinary Critical Care (CURATIVE) Domain 1- Defining populations at risk. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2021. Abstracts from the International Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Symposium, and the European Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care Annual Congress 2020.
×
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