Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Sep;38(9):2195-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-014-2522-2.

Inter-rater reliability of the PIPES tool: validation of a surgical capacity index for use in resource-limited settings

Affiliations

Inter-rater reliability of the PIPES tool: validation of a surgical capacity index for use in resource-limited settings

Abraham Markin et al. World J Surg. 2014 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: In response to the need for simple, rapid means of quantifying surgical capacity in low resource settings, Surgeons OverSeas (SOS) developed the personnel, infrastructure, procedures, equipment and supplies (PIPES) tool. The present investigation assessed the inter-rater reliability of the PIPES tool.

Methods: As part of a government assessment of surgical services in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, the PIPES tool was translated into Spanish and applied in interviews with physicians at 31 public hospitals. An additional interview was conducted with nurses at a convenience sample of 25 of these hospitals. Physician and nurse responses were then compared to generate an estimate of reliability. For dichotomous survey items, inter-rater reliability between physicians and nurses was assessed using the Cohen's kappa statistic and percent agreement. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to assess agreement for continuous items.

Results: Cohen's kappa was 0.46 for infrastructure, 0.43 for procedures, 0.26 for equipment, and 0 for supplies sections. The median correlation coefficient was 0.91 for continuous items. Correlation was 0.79 for the PIPES index, and ranged from 0.32 to 0.98 for continuous response items.

Conclusions: Reliability of the PIPES tool was moderate for the infrastructure and procedures sections, fair for the equipment section, and poor for supplies section when comparing surgeons' responses to nurses' responses-an extremely rigorous test of reliability. These results indicate that the PIPES tool is an effective measure of surgical capacity but that the equipment and supplies sections may need to be revised.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. PLoS Med. 2009 Dec;6(12):e1000200 - PubMed
    1. Arch Surg. 2012 Sep;147(9):798-803 - PubMed
    1. World J Surg. 2011 Mar;35(3):500-4 - PubMed
    1. World J Surg. 2012 Dec;36(12):2811-8 - PubMed
    1. Bull World Health Organ. 2011 Jun 1;89(6):394 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources