Interobserver agreement in ABCD scoring between non-stroke specialists and vascular neurologists following suspected TIA is only fair.

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/207874
Title:
Interobserver agreement in ABCD scoring between non-stroke specialists and vascular neurologists following suspected TIA is only fair.
Authors:
Kinsella, Justin A; Tobin, W Oliver; Cogan, Nicola; McCabe, Dominick J H
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, The Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin incorporating, National Children's Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Tallaght, Dublin, 24,, Ireland.
Citation:
J Neurol. 2011 Jun;258(6):1001-7. Epub 2010 Dec 25.
Journal:
Journal of neurology
Issue Date:
1-Feb-2012
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/207874
DOI:
10.1007/s00415-010-5870-3
PubMed ID:
21188409
Abstract:
The appropriateness of use and accuracy of age, blood pressure, clinical features and duration of symptoms (ABCD) scoring by non-stroke specialists while risk-stratifying patients with suspected transient ischaemic attack (TIA) are unknown. We reviewed all available ABCD data from referrals to a specialist neurovascular clinic. ABCD scoring was defined as 'appropriate' in this study if an experienced vascular neurologist subsequently confirmed a clinical diagnosis of possible, probable or definite TIA, and 'inappropriate' if the patient had an alternative diagnosis or stroke. Interobserver agreement between the referring physician and the neurologist was calculated. One hundred and four patients had completed ABCD referral proformas available for analysis. Forty-five (43%) were deemed appropriate, and 59 (57%) inappropriate. In the entire dataset, the neurologist agreed with the referring physician's total ABCD score in only 42% of cases [kappa = 0.28]. The two most unreliable components of the scoring system were clinical features [kappa = 0.51], and duration of symptoms [kappa = 0.48]. ABCD scoring by non-stroke specialists is frequently inappropriate and inaccurate in routine clinical practice, emphasising the importance of urgent specialist assessment of suspected TIA patients.
Language:
eng
MeSH:
Age Factors; Aged; Blood Pressure/physiology; *Consensus; Female; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient/*diagnosis/physiopathology; Male; Middle Aged; Neurology/*methods/standards; *Observer Variation; Physicians/psychology; *Severity of Illness Index; Specialization/*standards
ISSN:
1432-1459 (Electronic); 0340-5354 (Linking)

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorKinsella, Justin Aen_GB
dc.contributor.authorTobin, W Oliveren_GB
dc.contributor.authorCogan, Nicolaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMcCabe, Dominick J Hen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-01T10:48:49Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-01T10:48:49Z-
dc.date.issued2012-02-01T10:48:49Z-
dc.identifier.citationJ Neurol. 2011 Jun;258(6):1001-7. Epub 2010 Dec 25.en_GB
dc.identifier.issn1432-1459 (Electronic)en_GB
dc.identifier.issn0340-5354 (Linking)en_GB
dc.identifier.pmid21188409en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00415-010-5870-3en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/207874-
dc.description.abstractThe appropriateness of use and accuracy of age, blood pressure, clinical features and duration of symptoms (ABCD) scoring by non-stroke specialists while risk-stratifying patients with suspected transient ischaemic attack (TIA) are unknown. We reviewed all available ABCD data from referrals to a specialist neurovascular clinic. ABCD scoring was defined as 'appropriate' in this study if an experienced vascular neurologist subsequently confirmed a clinical diagnosis of possible, probable or definite TIA, and 'inappropriate' if the patient had an alternative diagnosis or stroke. Interobserver agreement between the referring physician and the neurologist was calculated. One hundred and four patients had completed ABCD referral proformas available for analysis. Forty-five (43%) were deemed appropriate, and 59 (57%) inappropriate. In the entire dataset, the neurologist agreed with the referring physician's total ABCD score in only 42% of cases [kappa = 0.28]. The two most unreliable components of the scoring system were clinical features [kappa = 0.51], and duration of symptoms [kappa = 0.48]. ABCD scoring by non-stroke specialists is frequently inappropriate and inaccurate in routine clinical practice, emphasising the importance of urgent specialist assessment of suspected TIA patients.en_GB
dc.language.isoengen_GB
dc.subject.meshAge Factorsen_GB
dc.subject.meshAgeden_GB
dc.subject.meshBlood Pressure/physiologyen_GB
dc.subject.mesh*Consensusen_GB
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_GB
dc.subject.meshHumansen_GB
dc.subject.meshIschemic Attack, Transient/*diagnosis/physiopathologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshMaleen_GB
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_GB
dc.subject.meshNeurology/*methods/standardsen_GB
dc.subject.mesh*Observer Variationen_GB
dc.subject.meshPhysicians/psychologyen_GB
dc.subject.mesh*Severity of Illness Indexen_GB
dc.subject.meshSpecialization/*standardsen_GB
dc.titleInterobserver agreement in ABCD scoring between non-stroke specialists and vascular neurologists following suspected TIA is only fair.en_GB
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Neurology, The Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin incorporating, National Children's Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Tallaght, Dublin, 24,, Ireland.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalJournal of neurologyen_GB
dc.description.provinceLeinster-

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.