Reproducibility and reliability of the ankle—brachial index as assessed by vascular experts,family physicians and nurses

Abstract

The reliability of ankle—brachial index (ABI) measurements performed by different observer groups in primary care has not yet been determined. The aims of the study were to provide precise estimates for all effects influencing the variability of the ABI (patients' individual variability, intra- and inter-observer variability), with particular focus on the performance of different observer groups. Using a partially balanced incomplete block design, 144 unselected individuals aged ≥ 65 years underwent double ABI measurements by one vascular surgeon or vascular physician, one family physician and one nurse with training in Doppler sonography. Three groups comprising a total of 108 individuals were analyzed (only two with ABI < 0.90). Errors for two repeated measurements for all three observer groups did not differ (experts 8.5%, family physicians 7.7%, and nurses 7.5%, p = 0.39). There was no relevant bias among observer groups. Intra-observer variability expressed as standard deviation divided by the mean was 8%, and inter-observer variability was 9%. In conclusion, reproducibility of the ABI measurement was good in this cohort of elderly patients who almost all had values in the normal range. The mean error of 8—9% within or between observers is smaller than with established screening measures. Since there were no differences among observers with different training backgrounds, our study confirms the appropriateness of ABI assessment for screening peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and generalized atherosclerosis in the primary case setting. Given the importance of the early detection and management of PAD, this diagnostic tool should be used routinely as a standard for PAD screening. Additional studies will be required to confirm our observations in patients with PAD of various severities.

Keywords

ankle—brachial index peripheral arterial disease precision reproducibility screening

References

Greenland P. , Abrams J. , Aurigemma GP et al. Prevention Conference V. Beyond secondary prevention: identifying the high-risk patient for primary prevention. Noninvasive tests of atherosclerotic burden. Circulation 2000; 101: E16—22.

Mohler ER III. Peripheral arterial disease: identification and implications. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 2306—14.

Belch Jjf , Topol EJ , Agnelli G. et al. Critical issues in peripheral arterial disease detection and management: A call to action. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 884—92.

McDermott MM , Criqui MH , Liu K. et al. Lower ankle/ brachial index, as calculated by averaging the dorsalis pedis and posterior tibial arterial pressures, and association with leg functioning in peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Surg 2000; 32: 1164—71.

Resnick HE , Lindsay RS , McDermott MM et al. Relationship of high and low ankle brachial index to all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality: the Strong Heart Study. Circulation 2004; 109: 733—39.

Dormandy J. , Rutherford R. Management of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). TASC Working Group. TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC). J Vasc Surg 2000; 31: S1—296.

Yao ST , Hobbs JT , Irvine WT Ankle systolic pressure measurements in arterial disease affecting the lower extremities. Br J Surg 1969; 56: 676—79.

Feringa Hhh , Bax Jjj , van Waning VH et al. The long-term prognostic value of the resting and postexercise ankle—brachial index. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 529—35.

Doobay AV , Anand SS Sensitivity and specificity of the ankle—brachial index to predict future cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2005; 25: 1463—69.

10.

Lee AJ , Price JF , Russell MJ , Smith FB , van Wijk Mcw , Fowkes Fgr. Improved prediction of fatal myocardial infarction using the ankle brachial index in addition to conventional risk factors: The Edinburgh Artery Study . Circulation 2004; 110: 3075—80.

11.

Murabito JM , Evans JC , Larson MG , Nieto K. , Levy D. , Wilson Pwf. The ankle—brachial index in the elderly and risk of stroke, coronary disease, and death: The Framingham Study. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 1939—42.

12.

O'Hare AM , Katz R. , Shlipak MG , Cushman M. , Newman AB Mortality and cardiovascular risk across the ankle—arm index spectrum: results from the Cardiovascular Health Study. Circulation 2006; 113: 388—93.

13.

Diehm C. , Lange S. , Darius H. et al. Association of low ankle brachial index with high mortality in primary care. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1743—49.

14.

American Diabetes Association. Peripheral arterial disease in people with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 3333—41.

15.

Endres HG , Hucke C. , Holland-Letz T. , Trampisch HJ A new efficient trial design for assessing reliability of ankle—brachial index measures by three different observer groups. Full text available at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2261/6/33. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2006; 6: 33—43.

16.

Street A. , Street D. Combinatorics of experimental design. Clarendon Press, 1987: section 11.3.

17.

Kaiser V. , Kester AD , Stoffers HE , Kitslaar PJ , Knottnerus JA The influence of experience on the reproducibility of the ankle—brachial systolic pressure ratio in peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1999; 18: 25—29.

18.

Leitlinien und Empfehlungen zur Sicherung von Guter Epidemiologischer Praxis (GEP). Available at: http://www .gmds.de/texte/onlinedocs/ empfehlungen/empf_gep_langfassung.htm, Arbeitsgruppe Epidemiologische Methoden der Deutschen Arbeitsgemeinschaft Epidemiologie (DAE).

19.

Bland JM , Altman DG Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; i: 307—10.

20.

Fowkes FG , Housley E. , Macintyre CC , Prescott RJ , Ruckley CV Variability of ankle and brachial systolic pressures in the measurement of atherosclerotic peripheral arterial disease. J Epidemiol Community Health 1988; 42: 128—33.

21.

Matzke S. , Franckena M. , Alback A. , Railo M. , Lepantalo M.

Ankle brachial index measurements in critical leg ischaemia — the influence of experience on reproducibility. Scand

J Surg 2003; 92: 144—47.

22.

Jeelani NU , Braithwaite BD , Tomlin C. , MacSweeney ST Variation of method for measurement of brachial artery pressure significantly affects ankle—brachial pressure index values. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2000; 20: 25—28.

23.

Osmundson PJ , O'Fallon WM , Clements IP , Kazmier FJ , Zimmerman BR , Palumbo PJ Reproducibility of noninvasive tests of peripheral occlusive arterial disease. J Vasc Surg 1985 ; 2: 678—83.

24.

Kerlikowske K. , Grady D. , Barclay J. et al. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90: 1801—809.

25.

Stoler MH , Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001; 285: 1500—505.

26.

Walsh JM , Terdiman JP Colorectal cancer screening: scientific review. JAMA 2003; 289: 1288—96.

27.

Grim C. , Grim C. Blood pressure management. American Heart Association Hypertension Primer. The essentials of high blood pressure. Basic science, population science, and clinical management. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999: 295—98.

28.

Armitage P. , Fox W. , Rose GA , Tinker CM The variability of measurements of casual blood pressure. II. Survey experience. Clin Sci 1966; 30: 337—44.