Agreement and accuracy using the FIGO, ACOG and NICE cardiotocography interpretation guidelines

© 2016 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Introduction: One of the limitations reported with cardiotocography is the modest interobserver agreement observed in tracing interpretation. This study compared agreement, reliability and accuracy of cardiotocography interpretation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2017-02, Vol.96 (2), p.166-175
Hauptverfasser: Santo, Susana, Ayres de Campos, Diogo, Costa Santos, Cristina, Schnettler, William, Ugwumadu, Austin, Graça, Luís Mendes
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:© 2016 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Introduction: One of the limitations reported with cardiotocography is the modest interobserver agreement observed in tracing interpretation. This study compared agreement, reliability and accuracy of cardiotocography interpretation using the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Material and methods: A total of 151 tracings were evaluated by 27 clinicians from three centers where International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines were routinely used. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using the proportions of agreement and reliability with the κ statistic. The accuracy of tracings classified as "pathological/category III" was assessed for prediction of newborn acidemia. For all measures, 95% confidence interval were calculated. Results: Cardiotocography classifications were more distributed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (9, 52, 39%) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (30, 33, 37%) than with American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (13, 81, 6%). The category with the highest agreement was American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology category II (proportions of agreement = 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.70-76), and the ones with the lowest agreement were American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology categories I and III. Reliability was significantly higher with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (κ = 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.43), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (κ = 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.39) than with American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (κ = 0.15, 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.21); however, all represent only slight/fair reliability. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence showed a trend towards higher sensitivities in prediction of newborn acidemia (89 and 97%, respectively) than American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (32%), but the latter achieved a significantly higher specificity (95%). Conclusions: With American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology guidelines there is high agreement in category II, low reliability, low sensitivity and hi
ISSN:0001-6349
1600-0412
DOI:10.1111/aogs.13064