Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis
Although bone biopsy has historically been considered the “gold standard” or “standard reference” for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, some contemporary investigations have provided evidence against this as a single diagnostic test and in support of a combination of clinical, laboratory...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of foot and ankle surgery 2018-11, Vol.57 (6), p.1137-1139 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1139 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1137 |
container_title | The Journal of foot and ankle surgery |
container_volume | 57 |
creator | Meyr, Andrew J. Seo, Kyung Khurana, Jasvir S. Choksi, Rachana Chakraborty, Baidarbhi |
description | Although bone biopsy has historically been considered the “gold standard” or “standard reference” for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, some contemporary investigations have provided evidence against this as a single diagnostic test and in support of a combination of clinical, laboratory, and radiographic findings. The objective of this investigation was to measure the level of agreement between several commonly used forms of diagnostic testing for diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A retrospective chart review was performed of 50 consecutive patients admitted to a single tertiary healthcare center with the documented performance of 1) a clinical probe-to-bone test on hospital admission; 2) plain film radiographs prior to any surgical intervention; 3) magnetic resonance imaging prior to any surgical intervention; and an intraoperative excisional bone debridement performed, with samples sent for both 4) histologic analysis and 5) microbiologic analysis. A frequency count of agreement among these 5 tests was performed, and the interobserver (or inter-test) agreement was measured using the kappa statistic. We observed low levels of inter-test agreement between the 5 diagnostic tests (range 42.0%–62.0%), and levels of chance-corrected agreement were well below what would be considered appropriate for a “gold standard” or “standard reference.” Levels of the kappa statistic ranged from 0.0 to 0.220, with most inter-test comparisons falling in the “poor agreement” and “slight agreement” interpretation ranges. The highest level of agreement occurred between the plain film radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (62.0% agreement and kappa statistic of 0.220). Although it is likely that a combination of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory tests provides the best diagnostic approach for diabetic foot osteomyelitis, the data provided herein indicate that the tests themselves might have high intrinsic levels of unreliability and that the specific combination of tests that might be best used remains unclear. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.05.010 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2099896229</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1067251618302205</els_id><sourcerecordid>2197781190</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-7f5084da981b9ba0c1c762b4df6129cc3d261c4d2d8ee92fb6c809dd69a2178b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU9PGzEQxS1EVSj0C3BAPnLZ7Xj2ny31EkEpSKm4UPWELK89SxztxunaQeLb11Ggx_Y0M9LvPY3eY-xCQCmgqb6sy_VgYokgZAlNCQKO2KloaiwQsT7OO7RdgY1oT9inGNcAiEo2H9lJlSUCKjxlT0t6oZGHgS-eZ6KJNon_8mnFDf-xG5MvHikmvthu52DsiqfA04r4jTfPmxB93Avz0VPylt-GkPhDTBSmVxp98vGcfRjMGOnz2zxjP2-_PV7fFcuH7_fXi2VhK6lS0Q0NyNoZJUWvegNW2K7FvnZDK1BZWzlsha0dOkmkcOhbK0E51yqDopN9dcauDr75zd-7_LGefLQ0jmZDYRc1CtV1UggF_0dBKananFRG8YDaOcQ406C3s5_M_KoF6H0Deq33Deh9AxoanRvIoss3_10_kfsreY88A18PAOVAXjzNOlpPG0vOz2STdsH_y_8Pp4KWig</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2099896229</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Meyr, Andrew J. ; Seo, Kyung ; Khurana, Jasvir S. ; Choksi, Rachana ; Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</creator><creatorcontrib>Meyr, Andrew J. ; Seo, Kyung ; Khurana, Jasvir S. ; Choksi, Rachana ; Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</creatorcontrib><description>Although bone biopsy has historically been considered the “gold standard” or “standard reference” for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, some contemporary investigations have provided evidence against this as a single diagnostic test and in support of a combination of clinical, laboratory, and radiographic findings. The objective of this investigation was to measure the level of agreement between several commonly used forms of diagnostic testing for diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A retrospective chart review was performed of 50 consecutive patients admitted to a single tertiary healthcare center with the documented performance of 1) a clinical probe-to-bone test on hospital admission; 2) plain film radiographs prior to any surgical intervention; 3) magnetic resonance imaging prior to any surgical intervention; and an intraoperative excisional bone debridement performed, with samples sent for both 4) histologic analysis and 5) microbiologic analysis. A frequency count of agreement among these 5 tests was performed, and the interobserver (or inter-test) agreement was measured using the kappa statistic. We observed low levels of inter-test agreement between the 5 diagnostic tests (range 42.0%–62.0%), and levels of chance-corrected agreement were well below what would be considered appropriate for a “gold standard” or “standard reference.” Levels of the kappa statistic ranged from 0.0 to 0.220, with most inter-test comparisons falling in the “poor agreement” and “slight agreement” interpretation ranges. The highest level of agreement occurred between the plain film radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (62.0% agreement and kappa statistic of 0.220). Although it is likely that a combination of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory tests provides the best diagnostic approach for diabetic foot osteomyelitis, the data provided herein indicate that the tests themselves might have high intrinsic levels of unreliability and that the specific combination of tests that might be best used remains unclear.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1067-2516</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-2224</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.05.010</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30181032</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biopsy ; bone infection ; Diabetic Foot - diagnosis ; Diabetic Foot - therapy ; diagnostic criteria ; Female ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Middle Aged ; nonhealing wound ; Osteomyelitis - diagnosis ; Osteomyelitis - therapy ; osteonecrosis ; Radiography ; Retrospective Studies</subject><ispartof>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery, 2018-11, Vol.57 (6), p.1137-1139</ispartof><rights>2018 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-7f5084da981b9ba0c1c762b4df6129cc3d261c4d2d8ee92fb6c809dd69a2178b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-7f5084da981b9ba0c1c762b4df6129cc3d261c4d2d8ee92fb6c809dd69a2178b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067251618302205$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30181032$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Meyr, Andrew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khurana, Jasvir S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choksi, Rachana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</creatorcontrib><title>Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis</title><title>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</title><addtitle>J Foot Ankle Surg</addtitle><description>Although bone biopsy has historically been considered the “gold standard” or “standard reference” for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, some contemporary investigations have provided evidence against this as a single diagnostic test and in support of a combination of clinical, laboratory, and radiographic findings. The objective of this investigation was to measure the level of agreement between several commonly used forms of diagnostic testing for diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A retrospective chart review was performed of 50 consecutive patients admitted to a single tertiary healthcare center with the documented performance of 1) a clinical probe-to-bone test on hospital admission; 2) plain film radiographs prior to any surgical intervention; 3) magnetic resonance imaging prior to any surgical intervention; and an intraoperative excisional bone debridement performed, with samples sent for both 4) histologic analysis and 5) microbiologic analysis. A frequency count of agreement among these 5 tests was performed, and the interobserver (or inter-test) agreement was measured using the kappa statistic. We observed low levels of inter-test agreement between the 5 diagnostic tests (range 42.0%–62.0%), and levels of chance-corrected agreement were well below what would be considered appropriate for a “gold standard” or “standard reference.” Levels of the kappa statistic ranged from 0.0 to 0.220, with most inter-test comparisons falling in the “poor agreement” and “slight agreement” interpretation ranges. The highest level of agreement occurred between the plain film radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (62.0% agreement and kappa statistic of 0.220). Although it is likely that a combination of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory tests provides the best diagnostic approach for diabetic foot osteomyelitis, the data provided herein indicate that the tests themselves might have high intrinsic levels of unreliability and that the specific combination of tests that might be best used remains unclear.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>bone infection</subject><subject>Diabetic Foot - diagnosis</subject><subject>Diabetic Foot - therapy</subject><subject>diagnostic criteria</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>nonhealing wound</subject><subject>Osteomyelitis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Osteomyelitis - therapy</subject><subject>osteonecrosis</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><issn>1067-2516</issn><issn>1542-2224</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU9PGzEQxS1EVSj0C3BAPnLZ7Xj2ny31EkEpSKm4UPWELK89SxztxunaQeLb11Ggx_Y0M9LvPY3eY-xCQCmgqb6sy_VgYokgZAlNCQKO2KloaiwQsT7OO7RdgY1oT9inGNcAiEo2H9lJlSUCKjxlT0t6oZGHgS-eZ6KJNon_8mnFDf-xG5MvHikmvthu52DsiqfA04r4jTfPmxB93Avz0VPylt-GkPhDTBSmVxp98vGcfRjMGOnz2zxjP2-_PV7fFcuH7_fXi2VhK6lS0Q0NyNoZJUWvegNW2K7FvnZDK1BZWzlsha0dOkmkcOhbK0E51yqDopN9dcauDr75zd-7_LGefLQ0jmZDYRc1CtV1UggF_0dBKananFRG8YDaOcQ406C3s5_M_KoF6H0Deq33Deh9AxoanRvIoss3_10_kfsreY88A18PAOVAXjzNOlpPG0vOz2STdsH_y_8Pp4KWig</recordid><startdate>20181101</startdate><enddate>20181101</enddate><creator>Meyr, Andrew J.</creator><creator>Seo, Kyung</creator><creator>Khurana, Jasvir S.</creator><creator>Choksi, Rachana</creator><creator>Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181101</creationdate><title>Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis</title><author>Meyr, Andrew J. ; Seo, Kyung ; Khurana, Jasvir S. ; Choksi, Rachana ; Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-7f5084da981b9ba0c1c762b4df6129cc3d261c4d2d8ee92fb6c809dd69a2178b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>bone infection</topic><topic>Diabetic Foot - diagnosis</topic><topic>Diabetic Foot - therapy</topic><topic>diagnostic criteria</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>nonhealing wound</topic><topic>Osteomyelitis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Osteomyelitis - therapy</topic><topic>osteonecrosis</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meyr, Andrew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khurana, Jasvir S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choksi, Rachana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meyr, Andrew J.</au><au>Seo, Kyung</au><au>Khurana, Jasvir S.</au><au>Choksi, Rachana</au><au>Chakraborty, Baidarbhi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Foot Ankle Surg</addtitle><date>2018-11-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1137</spage><epage>1139</epage><pages>1137-1139</pages><issn>1067-2516</issn><eissn>1542-2224</eissn><abstract>Although bone biopsy has historically been considered the “gold standard” or “standard reference” for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, some contemporary investigations have provided evidence against this as a single diagnostic test and in support of a combination of clinical, laboratory, and radiographic findings. The objective of this investigation was to measure the level of agreement between several commonly used forms of diagnostic testing for diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A retrospective chart review was performed of 50 consecutive patients admitted to a single tertiary healthcare center with the documented performance of 1) a clinical probe-to-bone test on hospital admission; 2) plain film radiographs prior to any surgical intervention; 3) magnetic resonance imaging prior to any surgical intervention; and an intraoperative excisional bone debridement performed, with samples sent for both 4) histologic analysis and 5) microbiologic analysis. A frequency count of agreement among these 5 tests was performed, and the interobserver (or inter-test) agreement was measured using the kappa statistic. We observed low levels of inter-test agreement between the 5 diagnostic tests (range 42.0%–62.0%), and levels of chance-corrected agreement were well below what would be considered appropriate for a “gold standard” or “standard reference.” Levels of the kappa statistic ranged from 0.0 to 0.220, with most inter-test comparisons falling in the “poor agreement” and “slight agreement” interpretation ranges. The highest level of agreement occurred between the plain film radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (62.0% agreement and kappa statistic of 0.220). Although it is likely that a combination of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory tests provides the best diagnostic approach for diabetic foot osteomyelitis, the data provided herein indicate that the tests themselves might have high intrinsic levels of unreliability and that the specific combination of tests that might be best used remains unclear.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>30181032</pmid><doi>10.1053/j.jfas.2018.05.010</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1067-2516 |
ispartof | The Journal of foot and ankle surgery, 2018-11, Vol.57 (6), p.1137-1139 |
issn | 1067-2516 1542-2224 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2099896229 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Biopsy bone infection Diabetic Foot - diagnosis Diabetic Foot - therapy diagnostic criteria Female Hospitalization Humans Magnetic Resonance Imaging Male Middle Aged nonhealing wound Osteomyelitis - diagnosis Osteomyelitis - therapy osteonecrosis Radiography Retrospective Studies |
title | Level of Agreement With a Multi-Test Approach to the Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T20%3A49%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Level%20of%20Agreement%20With%20a%20Multi-Test%20Approach%20to%20the%20Diagnosis%20of%20Diabetic%20Foot%20Osteomyelitis&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20foot%20and%20ankle%20surgery&rft.au=Meyr,%20Andrew%20J.&rft.date=2018-11-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1137&rft.epage=1139&rft.pages=1137-1139&rft.issn=1067-2516&rft.eissn=1542-2224&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.jfas.2018.05.010&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2197781190%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2099896229&rft_id=info:pmid/30181032&rft_els_id=S1067251618302205&rfr_iscdi=true |