Short Report: Complications
Inter-observer reproducibility of probing to bone in the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis
Article first published online: 19 SEP 2011
© 2011 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2011 Diabetes UK
Volume 28, Issue 10, pages 1238–1240, October 2011
How to Cite
García Morales, E., Lázaro-Martínez, J. L., Aragón-Sánchez, F. J., Cecilia-Matilla, A., Beneit-Montesinos, J. V. and González Jurado, M. A. (2011), Inter-observer reproducibility of probing to bone in the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. Diabetic Medicine, 28: 1238–1240. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03283.x
- Issue published online: 19 SEP 2011
- Article first published online: 19 SEP 2011
- Accepted manuscript online: 12 MAR 2011 01:16AM EST
- Accepted 4 March 2011
- diabetic foot;
- probing to bone;
Diabet. Med. 28, 1238–1240 (2011)
Aims The objectives of our study were (i) to analyse the inter-observer reproducibility or diagnostic variability of the probing-to-bone test, depending on the training of the professional involved, and (ii) to assess whether the probing-to-bone test can be extrapolated to any professional specialty that deals with these patients.
Methods This was a cross-sectional study, involving 75 patients with diabetic foot ulcer and clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis. A registration sheet was completed for all patients involved in the research study, gathering data relative to the results of the probing-to-bone test performed by three observers. Observer 1 was a very experienced professional with several years of experience in the treatment of the diabetic foot; observer 2 was a medium-experienced professional whose experience ranges from 6 to 12 months in the treatment of the diabetic foot; observer 3 was a healthcare professional without experience in the treatment of the diabetic foot. Data were gathered confidentially by a fourth researcher.
Results The results showed a kappa index of 0.593 (95% CI 0.407–0.778) between observer 1 and observer 2, 0.397 (95% CI 0.188–0.604) between observer 1 and observer 3 and 0.53 (95% CI 0.335–0.725) between observer 2 and observer 3.
Conclusions The probing-to-bone test demonstrated moderate to fair concordance with an experienced examiner, although the degree of concordance is not significant between groups.