Validity and reliability of Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III) in Finnish long-term care facilities

Resource Utilization Groups, Version III (RUG-III) is a case-mix system developed in the USA for classification of long-term care residents. This paper examines the validity and reliability of an adapted 22-group version of RUG-III (RUG-III/22) for use in long-term care facilities in Finland. Finnish cost weights for RUG-III/22 groups are calculated and different methods for their computation are evaluated. The study sample (1,964 residents) was collected in 1995 - 96 from ten long-term care facilities in Finland. RUG-III/22 alone explained 38.2% of the variance of total patient-specific (nursing + auxiliary staff) per diem cost. Resource use within RUG groups was relatively homogeneous. Other predictors of resource use included age, gender and length of stay. RUG-III/22 also met the standard for good reliability (i.e. a kappa value of 0.6 or higher) for crucial classification items, such as activities of daily living and high correlation between assessments based on relative cost.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68924/2/10.1177_14034948990270030201.pd

Inter- and intra-observer agreement on evaluating the presence of residual glandular tissue with magnetic resonance tomography following prophylactic mastectomy

Background: There are no published international consensus or guideline documents regarding appropriate medical follow-up for women with hereditary increased risk of breast cancer who opt for prophylactic mastectomy. Moreover, it is not known whether breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed after a prophylactic mastectomy is a reproducible method for evaluating whether clinically relevant amounts of residual glandular tissue remains. Purpose: To evaluate the inter- and intra-observer agreement on detecting residual glandular tissue with MRI. Material and Methods: In total, 40 women previously operated with prophylactic mastectomy underwent MRI and two breast radiologists (R1 and R2) independently assessed the presence of residual glandular tissue. Inter- and intra-rater agreements were assessed using Cohen's kappa (k). Results: Residual glandular tissue was found in 69 of 248 quadrants (27.8%) and 32 of 62 breasts (51.6%) by R1 and 77 of 248 quadrants (31.1%) and 35 of 62 breasts (56.5%) by R2. The interrater agreement was observed to be moderate (k = 0.554) and the intra-rater agreement was observed to be substantial (k = 0.623). Conclusion: In conclusion, the inter-and intra-rater observer agreement in regard to detection of residual glandular tissue was not excellent, which would be desirable for a method considered reproducible enough to be used as a surveillance tool after the surgical procedure in order to ensure that there is no relevant residual glandular tissue remaining warranting further follow-up. More research is needed, as well as establishment of precise protocols, before using the method in risk assessment of remaining glandular tissue and breast cancer risk