988368
شنبه 3 آذر 1403
چکیده: (640 مشاهده)
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the interrater reliability of the REEDCO postural score (RPS) between a physical therapist (PT) and a schoolteacher in healthy adolescents.
Methods: This study was a cross sectional study for interrater reliability evaluation. The standing posture of 86 adolescents were assessed using RPS scale. The schoolteacher and PT independently observed and scored 10 items of posture.
Results: The Kappa coefficients of all items assessed were slight to fair. There was no significant agreement between assessors on seven items including the Head, Shoulders, Spine, and Hip in the posterior view, as well as the Upper back, Abdomen, and Lower back in the lateral view. Furthermore, there were significant differences in the grading between the two assessors for seven items including the Shoulders, Hips, and Ankles in the posterior view, as well as the Neck, Upper back, Trunk, and Abdomen in the lateral view. The total score of the RPS was also significantly different between a PT and a schoolteacher (p<0.001).
Discussion: The results from this study showed poor to fair level of agreements for posture screening by RPS between and schoolteacher. This might be due to the different observation skills between two assessors. The sequence of assessment might also influence the assessment results. The more comprehensive training sessions should be considered in posture school screening program to improve reliability between assessors.
Methods: This study was a cross sectional study for interrater reliability evaluation. The standing posture of 86 adolescents were assessed using RPS scale. The schoolteacher and PT independently observed and scored 10 items of posture.
Results: The Kappa coefficients of all items assessed were slight to fair. There was no significant agreement between assessors on seven items including the Head, Shoulders, Spine, and Hip in the posterior view, as well as the Upper back, Abdomen, and Lower back in the lateral view. Furthermore, there were significant differences in the grading between the two assessors for seven items including the Shoulders, Hips, and Ankles in the posterior view, as well as the Neck, Upper back, Trunk, and Abdomen in the lateral view. The total score of the RPS was also significantly different between a PT and a schoolteacher (p<0.001).
Discussion: The results from this study showed poor to fair level of agreements for posture screening by RPS between and schoolteacher. This might be due to the different observation skills between two assessors. The sequence of assessment might also influence the assessment results. The more comprehensive training sessions should be considered in posture school screening program to improve reliability between assessors.
