Edmonton Quality Assessment Tool for Drug Utilization Reviews: EQUATDUR-2 - The development of a scale to assess the methodological quality of a drugutilization review
Ch. Spooner et al., Edmonton Quality Assessment Tool for Drug Utilization Reviews: EQUATDUR-2 - The development of a scale to assess the methodological quality of a drugutilization review, MED CARE, 38(9), 2000, pp. 948-958
Citations number
33
Categorie Soggetti
Public Health & Health Care Science","Health Care Sciences & Services
OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to develop an instrument that wi
ll assist in evaluating the methodological quality of drug utilization revi
ews (DURs) and studies of prescribing appropriateness.
DESIGN. An expert committee followed accepted steps for developing and test
ing new instruments. Consultations on content, face validity, and scoring o
f items were solicited from external experts. Seven raters tested an initia
l version; subsequently, a refined instrument was designed. The Edmonton Qu
ality Assessment Tool for Drug Utilization Reviews (EQUATDUR-2) evaluates 3
domains: sample selection (1 item), data collection (1 item), and data ana
lysis (3 items). Sixteen raters tested EQUATDUR-2 on a random sample of DUR
s.
MEASURES. The study measures were reliability-using random effects intercla
ss correlation coefficients for ratings by individual raters (ICC2,1) and t
he mean of ratings (ICC2,k)-and variability between DUR quality levels and
rater groups.
RESULTS. There were significant differences in methodological quality (P <
0.001) and in mean scores comparing low-, moderate-, and high-quality DURs.
Nonmethodologists' ratings exhibited significant variability (P = 0.03) an
d tended to be higher. Agreement varied for individual items (ICC2,1, 0.22
to 0.44; ICC2,k, 0.81 to 0.91) and for mean summary ratings (ICC2,1, 0.42 [
95% CI, 0.28 to 0.61]; ICC2,k, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86 to 0.96]). The average ti
me to rate each DUR was 10.0 minutes (95% CI, 9.2 to 10.9).
CONCLUSIONS. EQUATDUR-2 is a succinct, self-administered instrument with ev
idence of validity and reliability. We recommend that greater than or equal
to 2 raters independently assess each DUR and resolve disagreements by con
sensus. EQUATDUR-2 will help clinicians and decision makers to evaluate the
quality of DUR studies and provide a framework for enhancing rigor in the
design, conduct, and reporting of DURs.