HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dobben, A. C. Articles by Stoker, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dobben, A. C. Articles by Stoker, J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Prospective Assessment of Interobserver Agreement for Defecography in Fecal Incontinence

¹ Department of Radiology, G1-228, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.
² Department of Radiology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem 6815 AD, The Netherlands.
³ Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht 3584 CX, The Netherlands.
⁴ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.
⁵ Department of Colorectal Surgery, Academic Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht 6229 HX, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE. The primary aim of our study was to determine the interobserver agreement of defecography in diagnosing enterocele, anterior rectocele, intussusception, and anismus in fecal-incontinent patients. The subsidiary aim was to evaluate the influence of level of experience on interpreting defecography.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Defecography was performed in 105 consecutive fecal-incontinent patients. Observers were classified by level of experience and their findings were compared with the findings of an expert radiologist. The quality of the expert radiologist's findings was evaluated by an intraobserver agreement procedure.

RESULTS. Intraobserver agreement was good to very good except for anismus: incomplete evacuation after 30 sec (, 0.55) and puborectalis impression (, 0.54). Interobserver agreement for enterocele and rectocele was good (, 0.66 for both) and for intussusception, fair (, 0.29). Interobserver agreement for anismus: incomplete evacuation after 30 sec was moderate (, 0.47), and for anismus: puborectalis impression was fair (, 0.24). Agreement in grading of enterocele and rectocele was good (, 0.64 and 0.72, respectively) and for intussusception, fair (, 0.39). Agreement separated by experience level was very good for rectocele (, 0.83) and grading of rectoceles (, 0.83) and moderate for intussusception (, 0.44) at the most experienced level. For enterocele and grading, experience level did not influence the reproducibility.

CONCLUSION. Reproducibility for enterocele, anterior rectocele, and severity grading is good, but for intussusception is fair to moderate. For anismus, the diagnosis of incomplete evacuation after 30 sec is more reproducible than puborectalis impression. The level of experience seems to play a role in diagnosing anterior rectocele and its grading and in diagnosing intussusception.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. E. Lockhart, J. R. Fielding, H. E. Richter, L. Brubaker, C. G. Salomon, W. Ye, C. M. Hakim, C. Y. Wai, A. H. Stolpen, and A. M. Weber Reproducibility of Dynamic MR Imaging Pelvic Measurements: A Multi-institutional Study Radiology, November 1, 2008; 249(2): 534 - 540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Karasick Defecography for the Diagnosis of Abnormalities in Patients with Fecal Incontinence Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2006; 186(6): E20 - E20. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. C. Dobben and J. Stoker Reply Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2006; 186(6): E20 - E20. [Full Text] [PDF]