Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and reproducibility of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) in the initial phase of labor. As TPUS is a common method, it could supplement vaginal palpation and even replace it in certain situations. In addition, we used a 4-dimensional method for the assessment of cervical effacement. Materials and Methods 54 women in labor were included and underwent TPUS. The resulting images from the acquired 4D volumes were evaluated after the examination for the first time and a second time after 21 days. The measured values were cervical length, dilatation and effacement, the angle of progression (AoP), and head-perineum distance. Results 54 patients were examined. TPUS images were unable to be evaluated in 12 patients because of cervical dilatation of more than 5 cm or poor image quality. Thus, 42 measurements were included. The concordance correlation coefficients according to Lin are satisfactory overall, with one exception for cervical effacement. The accuracy component of cervical length (CCCLin: 0.93; accuracy: 1.00), dilatation (CCCLin: 0.93; accuracy: 1.00), and AoP (CCCLin: 0.87; accuracy: 1.00) is excellent and still high for the head-perineum distance (CCCLin: 0.89; accuracy: 0.96) and cervical effacement (CCCLin: 0.77; accuracy: 0.97). Conclusion TPUS is a valuable noninvasive tool with good diagnostic accuracy for the AoP, cervical length, and dilatation. Our study provides support for the use of TPUS to complement a vaginal examination. It should not replace a digital examination but should serve as a suitable alternative method for monitoring labor progression in the future.
Introduction Comprehensive regular foot self-care is one of the most critical self-management behaviors for people with diabetes to prevent foot ulcer development and related complications. Yet, adequate foot self-care is only practiced by very few of those affected. To improve diabetic foot syndrome prevention, a valid and reliable instrument for measuring daily foot-care routines in patients with diabetes is needed. However, no such instrument is currently available in the German language. This study, therefore, aims to translate and cross-culturally adapt the "Diabetic Foot Self-Care Behavior Scale" (DFSBS) into German (DFSBS-D) and evaluate its validity and reliability. Material and methods The DFSBS was translated from English into German using a forward-backward procedure as per previous recommendations. Factor analysis was used to study structural validity. To establish construct validity, 21 a priori hypotheses were defined regarding the expected correlation between scores on the new German version (i.e., DFSBS-D) and those of the following questionnaires measuring related constructs: (1) German version "Diabetes Self-Care Activities Measure" (SDSCA-G), (2) "Frankfurter Catalogue of Foot Self-Care" (FCFSP), and (3) "Short Form 36" (SF-36) and tested in 82 patients. To assess test-retest reliability, patients completed the DFSBS-D again after a 2-week interval. Test-retest reliability was assessed from stable patients’ data (n = 48) by calculating two-way random-effects absolute agreement ICCs with 95% CI and Bland and Altman analyses. In addition, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated as internal consistency measure. Results The 7-item DFSBS-D showed good structural validity. Its single factor explains 57% of the total sample variance. Of the 21 predefined hypotheses, 13 (62%) were confirmed. The DFSBS-D’s internal consistency was good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87). Test-retest reliability over a 2-week interval was also good (ICC 0.76). Conclusion The DFSBS was successfully translated into German. Statistical analyses showed good DFSBS-D structural validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency. Yet, construct validity may be debated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.