Patrizia Sonderer1, Schirin Akhbari Ziegler, Barbara Gressbach Oertle, André Meichtry, Mijna Hadders-Algra. 1. Institute of Physiotherapy (Mss Sonderer, Ziegler, and Oertle and Mr Meichtry), School of Health Professions, Zurich University of Applied Sciences ZHAW, Winterthur, Switzerland; and Department of Pediatrics-Division Developmental Neurology (Dr Hadders-Algra), University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Pediatric physical therapy (PPT) is characterized by heterogeneity. This blurs the evaluation of effective components of PPT. The Groningen Observation Protocol (GOP) was developed to quantify contents of PPT. This study assesses the reliability and completeness of the GOP. METHODS: Sixty infant PPT sessions were video-taped. Two random samples of 10 videos were used to determine interrater and intrarater reliability using interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals. Completeness of GOP 2.0 was based on 60 videos. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of quantifying PPT actions was excellent (ICC, 0.75-1.0) in 71% and sufficient to good (ICC, 0.4-0.74) in 24% of PPT actions. Intrarater reliability was excellent in 94% and sufficient to good in 6% of PPT actions. Completeness was good for greater than 90% of PPT actions. CONCLUSIONS: GOP 2.0 has good reliability and completeness. After appropriate training, it is a useful tool to quantify PPT for children with developmental disorders.
PURPOSE: Pediatric physical therapy (PPT) is characterized by heterogeneity. This blurs the evaluation of effective components of PPT. The Groningen Observation Protocol (GOP) was developed to quantify contents of PPT. This study assesses the reliability and completeness of the GOP. METHODS: Sixty infantPPT sessions were video-taped. Two random samples of 10 videos were used to determine interrater and intrarater reliability using interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals. Completeness of GOP 2.0 was based on 60 videos. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of quantifying PPT actions was excellent (ICC, 0.75-1.0) in 71% and sufficient to good (ICC, 0.4-0.74) in 24% of PPT actions. Intrarater reliability was excellent in 94% and sufficient to good in 6% of PPT actions. Completeness was good for greater than 90% of PPT actions. CONCLUSIONS: GOP 2.0 has good reliability and completeness. After appropriate training, it is a useful tool to quantify PPT for children with developmental disorders.