ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is used in the treatment of extremity problems. Classifying clinical problems is one method of providing effective treatment to a target population. Classification reliability is a key factor to determine the precise clinical problem and to direct an appropriate intervention. OBJECTIVES: To explore inter-examiner reliability of the MDT classification for extremity problems in three reliability designs: 1) vignette reliability using surveys with patient vignettes, 2) concurrent reliability, where multiple assessors decide a classification by observing someone's assessment, 3) successive reliability, where multiple assessors independently assess the same patient at different times. DESIGN: Systematic review with data synthesis in a quantitative format. METHOD: Agreement of MDT subgroups was examined using the Kappa value, with the operational definition of acceptable reliability set at ≥ 0.6. The level of evidence was determined considering the methodological quality of the studies. RESULTS/FINDINGS: Six studies were included and all studies met the criteria for high quality. Kappa values for the vignette reliability design (five studies) were ≥ 0.7. There was data from two cohorts in one study for the concurrent reliability design and the Kappa values ranged from 0.45 to 1.0. Kappa values for the successive reliability design (data from three cohorts in one study) were < 0.6. CONCLUSION: The current review found strong evidence of acceptable inter-examiner reliability of MDT classification for extremity problems in the vignette reliability design, limited evidence of acceptable reliability in the concurrent reliability design and unacceptable reliability in the successive reliability design.
