JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eberhart, L.
Right arrow Articles by Putzke, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Eberhart, L.
Right arrow Articles by Putzke, C.

Anesth Analg 2006;102:648
© 2006 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000190744.69115.C6

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Reliability Measurement with Unreliable Method

Leopold Eberhart, MD, Christian Arndt, MD, Thomas Cierpka, MD, Judith Schwanekamp, MD, Hinnerk Wulf, MD, and Caroline Putzke, MD

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany, eberhart{at}staff.uni-marburg.de

In Response:

We thank the Editor for the opportunity to reply to Drs. Araghi and Marashi’s letter. Their main criticism is the assumed lack of "synchronization" of the methodology between our trial and that used in the original study of Khan et al. (1).

One can speculate whether creating identical study conditions with respect to exclusion criteria, personal experience of all anesthesiologists, but also anesthesia technique, technical equipment, and approach for endotracheal intubation—the paper of Khan et al. (1) nearly completely lacks this important information—would have yielded in more positive results for the Upper Lip Bite test.

What is most important is not to simply repeat a trial that has already been performed but to test its applicability, reliability, and validity under "real life" conditions, and the latter may differ from institution to institution. If a test turns out to be not robust enough for clinical use in daily practice under slightly different conditions, it is of no value for the anesthesia community.

Reference

  1. Khan ZH, Kashfi A, Ebrahimkhani E. A comparison of the upper lip bite test (a simple new technique) with modified Mallampati classification in predicting difficulty in endotracheal intubation: a prospective blinded study. Anesth Analg 2003;96:595-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eberhart, L.
Right arrow Articles by Putzke, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Eberhart, L.
Right arrow Articles by Putzke, C.

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press