Champagne Bradley J, Steele Scott R, Hendren Samantha K, Bakaki Paul M, Roberts Patricia L, Delaney Conor P, Brady Justin T, MacRae Helen M
1 Department of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Fairview Hospital, Cleveland, Ohio 2 Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio 3 Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 4 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio 5 Department of Surgery, Lahey Clinic, Tufts University School of Medicine, Burlington, Massachusetts 6 Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio 7 Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Division of General Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Jul;60(7):738-744. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000817.
The lack of consensus for performance assessment of laparoscopic colorectal resection is a major impediment to quality improvement.
The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the validity of an evaluation tool for laparoscopic colectomy that is feasible for wide implementation.
During the pilot phase, a small group of experts modified previous assessment tools by watching videos for laparoscopic right colectomy with the following categories of experience: novice (less than 20 cases), intermediate (50-100 cases), and expert (more than 500 cases). After achieving sufficient reliability (κ > 0.8), a user-friendly tool was validated among a large group of blinded, trained experts.
The study was conducted through the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Operative Competency Evaluation Committee.
Raters were from the Operative Competency Evaluation Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.
Assessment tool reliability and internal consistency were measured.
From October 2014 through February 2015, 4 groups of 5 raters blinded to surgeon skill level evaluated 6 different laparoscopic right colectomy videos (novice = 2, intermediate = 2, expert = 2). The overall Cronbach α was 0.98 (>0.9 = excellent internal consistency). The intraclass correlation for the overall assessment was 0.93 (range, 0.77-0.93) and was >0.74 (excellent) for each step. The average scores (scale, 1-5) for experts were significantly better than those in the intermediate category, with a mean (SD) of 4.51 (0.56) versus 2.94 (0.56; p = 0.003). Videos in the intermediate group scored more favorably than beginner videos for each individual step and overall performance (mean (SD) = 3.00 (0.32) vs 1.78 (0.42); p = 0.006).
The study was limited by rater bias to technique and style.
The unique and robust methodology in this trial produced an assessment tool that was feasible for raters to use when assessing videotaped laparoscopic right hemicolectomies. The potential applications for this new tool are widespread, including both training and evaluation of competence at the attending level. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A369, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A370, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A371.
腹腔镜结直肠切除术的性能评估缺乏共识是质量改进的主要障碍。
本研究的目的是开发并评估一种腹腔镜结肠切除术评估工具的有效性,该工具便于广泛应用。
在试点阶段,一小群专家通过观看腹腔镜右半结肠切除术视频,根据以下经验类别修改先前的评估工具:新手(少于20例)、中级(50 - 100例)和专家(超过500例)。在获得足够的可靠性(κ>0.8)后,在一大群不知情的、经过培训的专家中对一个用户友好型工具进行了验证。
该研究通过美国结直肠外科医师协会手术能力评估委员会进行。
评估者来自美国结直肠外科医师协会手术能力评估委员会。
测量评估工具的可靠性和内部一致性。
从2014年10月到2015年2月,4组每组5名对手术医生技能水平不知情的评估者对6个不同的腹腔镜右半结肠切除术视频进行了评估(新手 = 2个,中级 = 2个,专家 = 2个)。总体Cronbach α为0.98(>0.9 = 优秀的内部一致性)。总体评估的组内相关系数为0.93(范围为0.77 - 0.93),每个步骤的组内相关系数均>0.74(优秀)。专家的平均得分(量表,1 - 5)显著高于中级组,分别为4.51(0.56)和2.94(0.56;p = 0.003)。中级组的视频在每个单独步骤和总体表现上的得分均高于新手组视频(平均(标准差)= 3.00(0.32)对1.78(0.42);p = 0.006)。
该研究受评估者对技术和风格的偏倚限制。
本试验中独特且稳健的方法产生了一种评估工具,评估者在评估录像的腹腔镜右半结肠切除术时使用该工具是可行的。这种新工具的潜在应用广泛,包括主治医生水平的培训和能力评估。见视频摘要:http://links.lww.com/DCR/A369,http://links.lww.com/DCR/A370,http://links.lww.com/DCR/A371。