{"title":"高分辨率肛肠测压术中操作者偏差的回顾性评价","authors":"D. Prichard, J. Fetzer","doi":"10.1111/nmo.14341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Measurements obtained during high‐resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) are subject to operator–patient interactions. For example, standardized enhanced instruction delivered by a single operator in a test–retest fashion did not consistently increase pressures generated during dynamic maneuvers. It is probable that factors other than verbal instruction effect communication during the procedure. To investigate this hypothesis, we retrospectively examined inter‐operator variance in HRM results.","PeriodicalId":19104,"journal":{"name":"Neurogastroenterology & Motility","volume":"80 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retrospective evaluation of operator bias in the performance of high‐resolution anorectal manometry\",\"authors\":\"D. Prichard, J. Fetzer\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nmo.14341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Measurements obtained during high‐resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) are subject to operator–patient interactions. For example, standardized enhanced instruction delivered by a single operator in a test–retest fashion did not consistently increase pressures generated during dynamic maneuvers. It is probable that factors other than verbal instruction effect communication during the procedure. To investigate this hypothesis, we retrospectively examined inter‐operator variance in HRM results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurogastroenterology & Motility\",\"volume\":\"80 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurogastroenterology & Motility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.14341\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurogastroenterology & Motility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.14341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Retrospective evaluation of operator bias in the performance of high‐resolution anorectal manometry
Measurements obtained during high‐resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) are subject to operator–patient interactions. For example, standardized enhanced instruction delivered by a single operator in a test–retest fashion did not consistently increase pressures generated during dynamic maneuvers. It is probable that factors other than verbal instruction effect communication during the procedure. To investigate this hypothesis, we retrospectively examined inter‐operator variance in HRM results.