Construction and comparative analysis of comprehensive clinical application evaluation system of capsule endoscopy

Abstract

Objective To establish an index evaluation system for evaluating the comprehensive clinical applications of capsule endoscopy and determine the weight of each indicator, and then utilize the evaluation system to comparatively analyze the domestic and imported capsule endoscopy in order to provide scientific basis for the applications including technology, clinic and market performance of the capsule endoscopy eventually. Methods The framework of evaluation system was preliminarily formulated through literature analysis and expert consultation, and the 3-level indicators and weight of them in capsule endoscopic evaluation were determined by Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Factor analysis was employed to empirically analyze the evaluation indexes of domestic and imported capsule endoscopes. Results The response rates of the 2 questionnaires were 93.3% (28/30) and 96.4% (27/28), respectively; the average authoritative coefficients of the experts were 0.867 and 0.858, respectively. The Kendall (Kendall) coordination coefficients of the 3-level indicators in the 2 questionnaires were 0.324, 0.189 and 0.140, and 0.280, 0.192 and 0.124, respectively (P < 0.01, by Chi-square test), with certain consistency. At last, we determined 3 indicators of primary indexes, 10 indicators of secondary indexes, and 41 indicators of tertiary indexes, and the weights of each indicator, among which the weights of first-level indicator for technology, clinic and market performance were 0.349 0, 0.437 4 and 0.213 6, respectively. Analysis of technical indicators showed that the domestic capsule endoscope had significantly smaller size (P < 0.01), obviously larger weight (P < 0.01), but remarkably lower resolution (P < 0.05) when compared with the imported one. In the evaluation of clinical performance indexes, the domestic capsule endoscope had significantly longer image processing time (P < 0.01), obviously lower picture resolution (P < 0.01), but markedly better portability and comfortableness of the recorder (P < 0.01) than the imported one. In terms of market performance, the price of domestic capsule endoscope was distinctly lower than that of imported capsule endoscopy (P < 0.01). Conclusion Our obtained 3-level indexes by experts are concentrated, consistent and credible. The capsule endoscopic evaluation index system constructed by Delphi and AHP is scientific, reasonable and practical. And the practical comparative analysis can further provide an objective and quantifiable basis for the research of clinical evaluations.

Keywords

• capsule endoscopy
• evaluation index
• delphi method
• analytic hierarchy process
• comparative analysis