Cargando…
The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: The ankle brachial index (ABI) is widely used in clinical practice as a non-invasive method to detect the presence and severity of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Current guidelines suggest that it should be used to monitor potential progression of PAD in affected individuals. As such...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6679535/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31388357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-019-0350-1 |
_version_ | 1783441357726023680 |
---|---|
author | Casey, Sarah Lanting, Sean Oldmeadow, Christopher Chuter, Vivienne |
author_facet | Casey, Sarah Lanting, Sean Oldmeadow, Christopher Chuter, Vivienne |
author_sort | Casey, Sarah |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The ankle brachial index (ABI) is widely used in clinical practice as a non-invasive method to detect the presence and severity of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Current guidelines suggest that it should be used to monitor potential progression of PAD in affected individuals. As such, it is important that the test is reliable when used for repeated measurements, by the same or different health practitioners. This systematic review aims to examine the literature to evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the ABI. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL Complete was conducted to 20 January 2019. Two authors independently reviewed and selected relevant studies and extracted the data. Methodological quality was determined using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability (QAREL) Checklist. RESULTS: Fifteen studies of ABI reliability in a range of patient populations were identified as suitable for inclusion in the review: seven considered inter-rater reliability, four intra-rater reliability, and four studies evaluated both inter- and intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was found to be highly variable, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC’s) ranging from poor to excellent (ICC 0.42–1.00), while intra-rater also demonstrated considerable variation, with ICCs from 0.42–0.98. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the lack of statistical information reported. CONCLUSIONS: Results of included studies suggest the inter- and intra-tester reliability of the ABI is acceptable. However, inconsistencies in obtaining systolic pressure measurements, calculating ABI values, and incomplete reporting of methodologies and statistical analysis make it difficult to determine the validity of the results of included studies. Further research, with more consistent reliability methodology, statistical analysis and reporting conducted in populations at risk of PAD is needed to conclusively determine the ABI reliability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6679535 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66795352019-08-06 The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review Casey, Sarah Lanting, Sean Oldmeadow, Christopher Chuter, Vivienne J Foot Ankle Res Review BACKGROUND: The ankle brachial index (ABI) is widely used in clinical practice as a non-invasive method to detect the presence and severity of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Current guidelines suggest that it should be used to monitor potential progression of PAD in affected individuals. As such, it is important that the test is reliable when used for repeated measurements, by the same or different health practitioners. This systematic review aims to examine the literature to evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the ABI. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL Complete was conducted to 20 January 2019. Two authors independently reviewed and selected relevant studies and extracted the data. Methodological quality was determined using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability (QAREL) Checklist. RESULTS: Fifteen studies of ABI reliability in a range of patient populations were identified as suitable for inclusion in the review: seven considered inter-rater reliability, four intra-rater reliability, and four studies evaluated both inter- and intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was found to be highly variable, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC’s) ranging from poor to excellent (ICC 0.42–1.00), while intra-rater also demonstrated considerable variation, with ICCs from 0.42–0.98. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the lack of statistical information reported. CONCLUSIONS: Results of included studies suggest the inter- and intra-tester reliability of the ABI is acceptable. However, inconsistencies in obtaining systolic pressure measurements, calculating ABI values, and incomplete reporting of methodologies and statistical analysis make it difficult to determine the validity of the results of included studies. Further research, with more consistent reliability methodology, statistical analysis and reporting conducted in populations at risk of PAD is needed to conclusively determine the ABI reliability. BioMed Central 2019-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6679535/ /pubmed/31388357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-019-0350-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Review Casey, Sarah Lanting, Sean Oldmeadow, Christopher Chuter, Vivienne The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title | The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title_full | The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title_short | The reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
title_sort | reliability of the ankle brachial index: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6679535/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31388357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-019-0350-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT caseysarah thereliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT lantingsean thereliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT oldmeadowchristopher thereliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT chutervivienne thereliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT caseysarah reliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT lantingsean reliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT oldmeadowchristopher reliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview AT chutervivienne reliabilityoftheanklebrachialindexasystematicreview |