BACKGROUND: The definitive criteria for assessing competence remain elusive. In our study, we aimed to identify the determinants of competence assessment used by individual laparoscopic surgeons. METHODS: In a blinded fashion, five laparoscopic surgeons rated 27 subjects on three laparoscopic simulations in four skill categories: clinical judgment, dexterity, serial/simultaneous complexity, and spatial orientation. The raters then assessed overall subject competence for each procedure. Point-biserial correlational analyses and cluster analyses were performed to ascertain the relationships among the various scales. RESULTS: All of the correlations between the skills' ratings and competence judgments were statistically significant ( p <.05). No skill rating was consistently more highly correlated with the competence rating. There were no distinct patterns of correlations for each rater or each procedure. One factor emerged from each cluster analysis of the skills measures. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the four skills scored in the study are highly correlated with each other and are important in determining competence. The cluster analyses revealed that the surgeon raters shared a common perception of competence.
BACKGROUND: The definitive criteria for assessing competence remain elusive. In our study, we aimed to identify the determinants of competence assessment used by individual laparoscopic surgeons. METHODS: In a blinded fashion, five laparoscopic surgeons rated 27 subjects on three laparoscopic simulations in four skill categories: clinical judgment, dexterity, serial/simultaneous complexity, and spatial orientation. The raters then assessed overall subject competence for each procedure. Point-biserial correlational analyses and cluster analyses were performed to ascertain the relationships among the various scales. RESULTS: All of the correlations between the skills' ratings and competence judgments were statistically significant ( p <.05). No skill rating was consistently more highly correlated with the competence rating. There were no distinct patterns of correlations for each rater or each procedure. One factor emerged from each cluster analysis of the skills measures. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the four skills scored in the study are highly correlated with each other and are important in determining competence. The cluster analyses revealed that the surgeon raters shared a common perception of competence.
Authors: D J Scott; P C Bergen; R V Rege; R Laycock; S T Tesfay; R J Valentine; D M Euhus; D R Jeyarajah; W M Thompson; D B Jones Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: G L Adrales; U B Chu; D B Witzke; M B Donnelly; D Hoskins; M J Mastrangelo; A Gandsas; A E Park Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2003-02-17 Impact factor: 4.584