Emergency Department, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne Université, GRC 14, BIOFAST, AP-HP, Paris.
Laboratoire Interuniversitaire des Sciences de l'Education (LISEC) - Learning Sciences Department, Strasbourg University, Strasbourg.
Eur J Emerg Med. 2024 Aug 1;31(4):281-286. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000001133. Epub 2024 Mar 19.
The assessment of technical and nontechnical skills in emergency medicine requires reliable and usable tools. Three Acute Care Assessment Tools (ACATs) have been developed to assess medical learners in their management of cardiac arrest (ACAT-CA), coma (ACAT-coma) and acute respiratory failure (ACAT-ARF).
This study aims to analyze the reliability and usability of the three ACATs when used for in situ (bedside) simulation.
This prospective multicenter validation study tested ACATs using interprofessional in situ simulations in seven emergency departments and invited training residents to participate in them. Each session was rated by two independent raters using ACAT. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess interrater reliability, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each ACAT. The correlation between ACATs' scores and the learners' level of performance was also assessed. Finally, a questionnaire and two focus groups were used to assess the usability of the ACATs.
A total of 104 in situ simulation sessions, including 85 residents, were evaluated by 37 raters. The ICC for ACAT-CA, ACAT-coma and ACAT-ARF were 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93-0.98], 0.89 (95% CI, 0.77-0.95) and 0.92 (95%CI 0.83-0.96), respectively. The Cronbach's alphas were 0.79, 0.80 and 0.73, respectively. The ACAT-CA and ARF showed good construct validity, as third-year residents obtained significantly higher scores than first-year residents ( P < 0.001; P < 0.019). The raters supported the usability of the tools, even though they expressed concerns regarding the use of simulations in a summative way.
This study reported that the three ACATs showed good external validity and usability.
在急诊医学中评估技术和非技术技能需要可靠且可用的工具。已经开发了三种急性护理评估工具(ACAT),用于评估学习者在心脏骤停(ACAT-CA)、昏迷(ACAT-coma)和急性呼吸衰竭(ACAT-ARF)管理方面的表现。
本研究旨在分析这三种 ACAT 在现场(床边)模拟中的可靠性和可用性。
本前瞻性多中心验证研究使用跨专业现场模拟测试了 ACAT,邀请培训住院医师参与其中。每个模拟课程均由两名独立评分者使用 ACAT 进行评分。采用组内相关系数(ICC)评估评分者间的可靠性,采用克朗巴赫 α 系数评估每个 ACAT 的内部一致性。还评估了 ACAT 评分与学习者表现水平之间的相关性。最后,使用问卷和两个焦点小组评估了 ACAT 的可用性。
共评估了 104 个现场模拟课程,包括 85 名住院医师,由 37 名评分者进行评估。ACAT-CA、ACAT-coma 和 ACAT-ARF 的 ICC 分别为 0.95 [95%置信区间(CI),0.93-0.98]、0.89(95%CI,0.77-0.95)和 0.92(95%CI 0.83-0.96),克朗巴赫 α 系数分别为 0.79、0.80 和 0.73。ACAT-CA 和 ARF 显示出良好的结构有效性,因为三年级住院医师的得分明显高于一年级住院医师(P <0.001;P <0.019)。评分者支持这些工具的可用性,尽管他们对以总结性的方式使用模拟表示担忧。
本研究报告称,这三种 ACAT 具有良好的外部有效性和可用性。