School of ITEE, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Simul Healthc. 2011 Oct;6(5):260-8. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e31821eaa38.
Team training in healthcare is usually evaluated by observers who either score trainees' behaviors, social skills, and cognitive skills during simulation or measure changes in the clinical state of a mannequin. Both methods have shortcomings that limit their usefulness. We propose Brunswik's probabilistic functionalism and the Accuracy Score (AS), a measure emerging from judgment analysis, as elements of a complementary approach that could increase the objectivity of team training evaluation. We report an initial investigation.
Three groups of neonatal clinicians participated in a resuscitation experiment involving three different training interventions. During the experiment, at various phases, the participants were required to assign an Apgar score to a mannequin.
The AS was used to test how accurately the clinicians assigned Apgar scores to the mannequin across different levels of task demand, training content, and training delivery method.
The AS was lower when task demand increased (P < 0.01). The AS was higher after teamwork training than after clinical training (P < 0.05) and better after hands-on teamwork training than after lecture-based teamwork training (P < 0.05).
Because it is simple and objective, the AS may complement existing measures for team training evaluation. Future studies are required in which the AS is tested with a larger number of trainees, in longitudinal experiments, across different training areas, and is compared with previously validated team performance measures.
医疗团队培训通常由观察者进行评估,他们要么在模拟过程中对学员的行为、社交技能和认知技能进行评分,要么测量模拟人临床状态的变化。这两种方法都有其局限性,限制了它们的有用性。我们提出 Brunswik 的概率功能主义和准确度评分(AS)作为一种互补方法的要素,该方法可以提高团队培训评估的客观性。我们报告了一项初步调查。
三组新生儿临床医生参与了一项复苏实验,涉及三种不同的培训干预措施。在实验过程中,参与者需要在不同阶段为模拟人分配 Apgar 评分。
使用 AS 来测试临床医生在不同任务需求、培训内容和培训交付方法下,对模拟人分配 Apgar 评分的准确性。
任务需求增加时,AS 降低(P < 0.01)。与临床培训相比,团队培训后 AS 更高(P < 0.05),实践型团队培训后 AS 高于讲座型团队培训后 AS(P < 0.05)。
由于 AS 简单客观,因此它可能是团队培训评估的现有方法的补充。需要进一步研究,在更大数量的学员中,在纵向实验中,在不同的培训领域中,以及与以前验证过的团队绩效衡量标准进行比较,来测试 AS。