TY - JOUR
T1 - The reliability of the McKenzie classification system using extremity McKenzie assessment forms
AU - Kelly, Elizabeth
AU - May, Stephen
AU - Ross, Jennifer
N1 - dc.publisher: McKenzie Institute International
PY - 2008
Y1 - 2008
N2 - Objectives: To investigate the reliability of experienced physiotherapists in classifying patients in McKenzie’s non-specific mechanical syndromes from extremity McKenzie assessment forms. Design: Inter-therapists reliability pilot study using patient vignettes. Setting: NHS outpatients department, UK. Method: Three McKenzie ‘credentialed’ therapists, who had taken a course in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy for the Extremities, independently examined 11 completed McKenzie assessment forms with the classification conclusion omitted. These had been completed by a fourth therapist who was a faculty member of the McKenzie Institute teaching programme, and whose classification conclusions represented a ‘gold standard’ against which to judge the other therapists’ conclusions. Outcomes: Reliability was expressed as percentage agreement and kappa. Results: The reliability of syndrome classification was ‘good’, 82% agreement, kappa 0.7. Against the ‘gold standard’ the therapist with more training was more reliable. Conclusion: In this pilot study, the reliability of McKenzie’s mechanical syndrome classification in extremity patients was good and warrants further investigation in a larger cohort of therapists and amongst real patients rather than paper vignettes.
AB - Objectives: To investigate the reliability of experienced physiotherapists in classifying patients in McKenzie’s non-specific mechanical syndromes from extremity McKenzie assessment forms. Design: Inter-therapists reliability pilot study using patient vignettes. Setting: NHS outpatients department, UK. Method: Three McKenzie ‘credentialed’ therapists, who had taken a course in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy for the Extremities, independently examined 11 completed McKenzie assessment forms with the classification conclusion omitted. These had been completed by a fourth therapist who was a faculty member of the McKenzie Institute teaching programme, and whose classification conclusions represented a ‘gold standard’ against which to judge the other therapists’ conclusions. Outcomes: Reliability was expressed as percentage agreement and kappa. Results: The reliability of syndrome classification was ‘good’, 82% agreement, kappa 0.7. Against the ‘gold standard’ the therapist with more training was more reliable. Conclusion: In this pilot study, the reliability of McKenzie’s mechanical syndrome classification in extremity patients was good and warrants further investigation in a larger cohort of therapists and amongst real patients rather than paper vignettes.
M3 - Article
VL - 3
SP - 3
EP - 6
JO - International Journal of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy
JF - International Journal of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy
IS - 3
ER -