Lie Désirée A, Richter-Lagha Regina, Forest Christopher P, Walsh Anne, Lohenry Kevin
a Department of Family Medicine , Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California , CA , USA.
Med Educ Online. 2017;22(1):1314751. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2017.1314751.
There is a need for validated and easy-to-apply behavior-based tools for assessing interprofessional team competencies in clinical settings. The seven-item observer-based Modified McMaster-Ottawa scale was developed for the Team Objective Structured Clinical Encounter (TOSCE) to assess individual and team performance in interprofessional patient encounters.
We aimed to improve scale usability for clinical settings by reducing item numbers while maintaining generalizability; and to explore the minimum number of observed cases required to achieve modest generalizability for giving feedback.
We administered a two-station TOSCE in April 2016 to 63 students split into 16 newly-formed teams, each consisting of four professions. The stations were of similar difficulty. We trained sixteen faculty to rate two teams each. We examined individual and team performance scores using generalizability (G) theory and principal component analysis (PCA).
The seven-item scale shows modest generalizability (.75) with individual scores. PCA revealed multicollinearity and singularity among scale items and we identified three potential items for removal. Reducing items for individual scores from seven to four (measuring Collaboration, Roles, Patient/Family-centeredness, and Conflict Management) changed scale generalizability from .75 to .73. Performance assessment with two cases is associated with reasonable generalizability (.73). Students in newly-formed interprofessional teams show a learning curve after one patient encounter. Team scores from a two-station TOSCE demonstrate low generalizability whether the scale consisted of four (.53) or seven items (.55).
The four-item Modified McMaster-Ottawa scale for assessing individual performance in interprofessional teams retains the generalizability and validity of the seven-item scale. Observation of students in teams interacting with two different patients provides reasonably reliable ratings for giving feedback. The four-item scale has potential for assessing individual student skills and the impact of IPE curricula in clinical practice settings.
IPE: Interprofessional education; SP: Standardized patient; TOSCE: Team objective structured clinical encounter.
在临床环境中,需要经过验证且易于应用的基于行为的工具来评估跨专业团队的能力。基于观察者的七项改良麦克马斯特 - 渥太华量表是为团队客观结构化临床考核(TOSCE)开发的,用于评估跨专业患者诊疗过程中的个人和团队表现。
我们旨在通过减少项目数量同时保持通用性来提高该量表在临床环境中的可用性;并探索为提供反馈而实现适度通用性所需的最少观察病例数。
2016年4月,我们对63名学生进行了双站式TOSCE考核,这些学生被分成16个新组建的团队,每个团队由四个专业的学生组成。两个考核站难度相似。我们培训了16名教员,让他们每人对两个团队进行评分。我们使用通用izability(G)理论和主成分分析(PCA)来检查个人和团队的表现分数。
七项量表在个人得分方面显示出适度的通用性(.75)。主成分分析揭示了量表项目之间的多重共线性和奇异性,我们确定了三个可能要删除的项目。将个人得分的项目从七个减少到四个(衡量协作、角色、以患者/家庭为中心和冲突管理)后,量表通用性从.75变为.73。对两个病例进行的表现评估具有合理的通用性(.73)。新组建的跨专业团队中的学生在经历一次患者诊疗后呈现出学习曲线。双站式TOSCE的团队得分显示出较低的通用性,无论量表由四个项目(.53)还是七个项目(.55)组成。
用于评估跨专业团队中个人表现的四项改良麦克马斯特 - 渥太华量表保留了七项量表的通用性和有效性。观察团队中与两名不同患者互动的学生可为提供反馈提供合理可靠的评分。四项量表有潜力评估学生个人技能以及跨专业教育课程在临床实践环境中的影响。
IPE:跨专业教育;SP:标准化患者;TOSCE:团队客观结构化临床考核