Open AccessHigh resolution anorectal manometry. Recommendations on russian-language terminology based on interdisciplinary consensus
Author(s) -
Ю. А. Шелыгин,
О. Ю. Фоменко,
Sergey Morozov,
И. В. Маев,
Д. Б. Никитюк,
Д. В. Алешин,
С. И. Ачкасов,
Е. В. Баркалова,
Б. М. Башанкаев,
О. М. Бирюков,
М. Г. Бирюкова,
Dmitry S. Bordin,
А В Варданян,
А. В. Веселов,
М. Ю. Гвоздев,
Л. Х. Индейкина,
Vasily Isakov,
Г. Р. Касян,
А. М. Кузьминов,
Ю. А. Кучерявый,
В. А. Пилипенко,
E.S. Pimenova,
А А Попов,
К. В. Пучков,
Е. Г. Рыбаков,
А. Ю. Титов,
А. А. Фёдоров,
Е. Д. Фёдоров,
С. В. Чернышов,
М. В. Шапина,
П. В. Шорников
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
èksperimentalʹnaâ i kliničeskaâ gastroènterologiâ
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1682-8658
DOI - 10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-174-2-55-64
Subject(s) - terminology , medicine , harmonization , consistency (knowledge bases) , english language , medical education , medical physics , family medicine , linguistics , artificial intelligence , computer science , philosophy , physics , acoustics
The aim of the paper — is to present the results of the consensus on the terminology used to describe data of high-resolution anorectal manometry. Methods: Online survey was conducted with the help of the public platform “Google forms” with the aim to harmonize the terms, which are used to conduct high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM), to agree the conformity of the proposed Russian-language terms to those used in English-language literature, and their abbreviations. Results: According to the aim, 56 specialists of different medical specialties who perform and use the results of HRAM in clinical practice and research were invited to participate in the survey. We received 45 answers from the respondents (42.2% coloproctologists, 22.2% gastroenterologists, 15.6% surgeons, 20% — representatives of other specialties). The response rate was 80.3%. According to the survey, 95.6% of respondents supported the need for harmonization of terms. Ten out of the 11 terms reached consensus level C1 (excellent), 1 term level of consistency was C2 (moderate). 90.9% of respondents (consensus level C1) were in favor of the appropriateness of using common abbreviations. However, the proposed abbreviations of the terms used in the conduct and description of the results of the HRAM can be accepted with reservations (in 10 cases out of 11 consensus level was C2). Conclusions: The agreed in interdisciplinary consensus terms can be approved and recommended for the use in clinical practice and when research data are published in Russian-language scientific literature.