Gottlieb Michael, Jordan Jaime, Siegelman Jeffrey N, Cooney Robert, Stehman Christine, Chan Teresa M
Department of Emergency Medicine Rush University Medical Center Chicago IL USA.
Department of Emergency Medicine Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center Los Angeles CA USA.
AEM Educ Train. 2020 Sep 4;5(3):e10519. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10519. eCollection 2021 Jul.
Direct observation is important for assessing the competency of medical learners. Multiple tools have been described in other fields, although the degree of emergency medicine-specific literature is unclear. This review sought to summarize the current literature on direct observation tools in the emergency department (ED) setting.
We searched PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ERIC, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar from 2012 to 2020 for publications on direct observation tools in the ED setting. Data were dual extracted into a predefined worksheet, and quality analysis was performed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument.
We identified 38 publications, comprising 2,977 learners. Fifteen different tools were described. The most commonly assessed tools included the Milestones (nine studies), Observed Structured Clinical Exercises (seven studies), the McMaster Modular Assessment Program (six studies), Queen's Simulation Assessment Test (five studies), and the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (four studies). Most of the studies were performed in a single institution, and there were limited validity or reliability assessments reported.
The number of publications on direct observation tools for the ED setting has markedly increased. However, there remains a need for stronger internal and external validity data.
直接观察对于评估医学学习者的能力很重要。其他领域已描述了多种工具,尽管急诊医学特定文献的数量尚不清楚。本综述旨在总结当前关于急诊科直接观察工具的文献。
我们检索了2012年至2020年期间的PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL、Cochrane临床试验中央注册库、Cochrane系统评价数据库、ERIC、PsycINFO和谷歌学术,以获取有关急诊科直接观察工具的出版物。数据被双重提取到预定义的工作表中,并使用医学教育研究质量工具进行质量分析。
我们确定了38篇出版物,涉及2977名学习者。描述了15种不同的工具。最常评估的工具包括里程碑(9项研究)、观察性结构化临床练习(7项研究)、麦克马斯特模块化评估计划(6项研究)、女王模拟评估测试(5项研究)和迷你临床评估练习(4项研究)。大多数研究是在单一机构进行的,报告的有效性或可靠性评估有限。
关于急诊科直接观察工具的出版物数量显著增加。然而,仍然需要更强的内部和外部有效性数据。