Dataset Information

Inter-rater agreement of CDC criteria and ASEPSIS score in assessing surgical site infections after cesarean section: a prospective observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess and compare the inter-rater agreement of the CDC criteria and the ASEPSIS score in identifying surgical site infections after cesarean section.

Methods

Prospective observational study including 110 patients subjected to a cesarean section at our institution. Surgical wounds were managed according to standard care and were photographed on the third, seventh, and thirtieth postoperative day or during any evaluation in case of complications. Three expert surgeons reviewed the prospectively gathered data and photographs and classified each wound using CDC criteria and the ASEPSIS score. The inter-rater agreements of CDC criteria and ASEPSIS score were determined with Krippendorff's Alpha with linear weights and compared with a confidence interval approach.

Results

The weighted α coefficient for CDC criteria was 0.587 (95%CI, 0.411-0.763, p < 0.001, "moderate" agreement according to Altman's interpretation of weighted agreement coefficient), while the weighted α coefficient for the ASEPSIS score was 0.856 (95%CI, 0.733-0.980, p < 0.001, "very good" agreement).

Conclusion

ASEPSIS score presents a "very good" inter-rater agreement for surgical site infections identification after cesarean, resulting in a more objective method than CDC criteria ("moderate" inter-rater agreement). ASEPSIS score could represent an objective tool for managing and monitoring surgical site infections after cesarean section, also by photographic evaluation.

SUBMITTER: Delli Carpini G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10477579 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Inter-rater agreement of CDC criteria and ASEPSIS score in assessing surgical site infections after cesarean section: a prospective observational study.

Delli Carpini Giovanni G Giannella Luca L Di Giuseppe Jacopo J Fioretti Marco M Franconi Ilaria I Gatti Ludovica L Sabbatini Keti K Montanari Michele M Marconi Chiara C Tafuri Elisa E Tibaldi Luisa L Fichera Mariasole M Pizzagalli Davide D Ciavattini Andrea A

Frontiers in surgery 20230822

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess and compare the inter-rater agreement of the CDC criteria and the ASEPSIS score in identifying surgical site infections after cesarean section.<h4>Methods</h4>Prospective observational study including 110 patients subjected to a cesarean section at our institution. Surgical wounds were managed according to standard care and were photographed on the third, seventh, and thirtieth postoperative day or during any evaluation in case of complications. Three expert surgeons ...[more]

PMID: 37675248

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives To explore agreement among healthcare professionals assessing eligibility for work disability benefits.Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis of reproducibility studies.Data sources Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO searched up to 16 March 2016, without language restrictions, and review of bibliographies of included studies.Eligibility criteria Observational studies investigating reproducibility among healthcare professionals performing disability evaluations using a global rating of working capacity and reporting inter-rater reliability by a statistical measure or descriptively. Studies could be conducted in insurance settings, where decisions on ability to work include normative judgments based on legal considerations, or in research settings, where decisions on ability to work disregard normative considerations. : Teams of paired reviewers identified eligible studies, appraised their methodological quality and generalisability, and abstracted results with pretested forms. As heterogeneity of research designs and findings impeded a quantitative analysis, a descriptive synthesis stratified by setting (insurance or research) was performed.Results From 4562 references, 101 full text articles were reviewed. Of these, 16 studies conducted in an insurance setting and seven in a research setting, performed in 12 countries, met the inclusion criteria. Studies in the insurance setting were conducted with medical experts assessing claimants who were actual disability claimants or played by actors, hypothetical cases, or short written scenarios. Conditions were mental (n=6, 38%), musculoskeletal (n=4, 25%), or mixed (n=6, 38%). Applicability of findings from studies conducted in an insurance setting to real life evaluations ranged from generalisable (n=7, 44%) and probably generalisable (n=3, 19%) to probably not generalisable (n=6, 37%). Median inter-rater reliability among experts was 0.45 (range intraclass correlation coefficient 0.86 to κ-0.10). Inter-rater reliability was poor in six studies (37%) and excellent in only two (13%). This contrasts with studies conducted in the research setting, where the median inter-rater reliability was 0.76 (range 0.91-0.53), and 71% (5/7) studies achieved excellent inter-rater reliability. Reliability between assessing professionals was higher when the evaluation was guided by a standardised instrument (23 studies, P=0.006). No such association was detected for subjective or chronic health conditions or the studies' generalisability to real world evaluation of disability (P=0.46, 0.45, and 0.65, respectively).Conclusions Despite their common use and far reaching consequences for workers claiming disabling injury or illness, research on the reliability of medical evaluations of disability for work is limited and indicates high variation in judgments among assessing professionals. Standardising the evaluation process could improve reliability. Development and testing of instruments and structured approaches to improve reliability in evaluation of disability are urgently needed.

Dataset Information

Inter-rater agreement of CDC criteria and ASEPSIS score in assessing surgical site infections after cesarean section: a prospective observational study.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Inter-rater agreement of CDC criteria and ASEPSIS score in assessing surgical site infections after cesarean section: a prospective observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets