Suppr超能文献

Reliability of the direct observation of procedural skills assessment tool for ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia.

作者信息

Chuan A, Thillainathan S, Graham P L, Jolly B, Wong D M, Smith N, Barrington M J

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia, Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, New South Wales.

Anaesthesia Registrar, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, NSW.

出版信息

Anaesth Intensive Care. 2016 Mar;44(2):201-9. doi: 10.1177/0310057X1604400206.

Abstract

The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) form is used as a workplace-based assessment tool in the current Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists curriculum. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reliability of DOPS when used to score trainees performing ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia. Reliability of an assessment tool is defined as the reproducibility of scores given by different assessors viewing the same trainee. Forty-nine anaesthetists were recruited to score two scripted videos of trainees performing a popliteal sciatic nerve block and an axillary brachial plexus block. Reliability, as measured by intraclass correlation coefficients, was -0.01 to 0.43 for the individual items in DOPS, and 0.15 for the 'Overall Performance for this Procedure' item. Assessors demonstrated consistency of scoring within DOPS, with significant correlation of sum of individual item scores with the 'Overall Performance for this Procedure' item (r=0.78 to 0.80, P<0.001), and with yes versus no responses to the 'Was the procedure completed satisfactorily?' item (W=24, P=0.0004, Video 1, and W=65, P=0.003, Video 2). While DOPS demonstrated a good degree of internal consistency in this setting, inter-rater reliability did not reach levels generally recommended for formative assessment tools. Feasibility of the form could be improved by removing the 'Was the procedure completed satisfactorily?' item without loss of information.

摘要

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验