Literature DB >> 18833311

Initial reliability of the Standardized Orthopedic Assessment Tool (SOAT).

Mark R Lafave1, Larry Katz, Tyrone Donnon, Dale J Butterwick.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Orthopaedic assessment skills are critical to the success of athletic therapists and trainers. The Standardized Orthopedic Assessment Tool (SOAT) has been content validated.
OBJECTIVE: To establish interrater reliability of the SOAT. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two college students, 10 raters, and 2 standardized patients (SPs) from Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
DESIGN: Randomized observational study. INTERVENTION(S): Students were allowed 30 minutes to complete a mock orthopaedic assessment of an SP with an injury specific to a region of the body (shoulder, knee, or ankle). Using the region-specific SOAT, raters and SPs evaluated students' orthopaedic assessment skills. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The sum totals of the SOAT for 2 raters and 1 SP were used to calculate each student's performance scores for respective scenarios. Scale reliability analysis (Cronbach alpha) was completed on the SOAT for each of the 3 body-region examinations.
RESULTS: The mean overall reliability of 3 SOATs (ie, ankle, knee, and shoulder) was positive: alpha = .85 with the SP scores factored into the equation and alpha = .86 without the SP scores factored into the equation. Reliability for the ankle region was highest (alpha = .91), followed by the knee (alpha = .83) and the shoulder (alpha = .82).
CONCLUSIONS: The study sample size was small, but the results will enable further study with generalization to a broader audience of athletic therapists and athletic trainers. Because a baseline measure of reliability was established using a robust statistical analysis, future researchers can employ more stringent statistical analysis and focus on the effects of various pedagogical techniques to teach and learn the underlying construct of clinical competence in orthopaedic assessment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Objective Structured Clinical Examinations; education; measurement and evaluation; musculoskeletal assessment; validity

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18833311      PMCID: PMC2547868          DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-43.5.483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Athl Train        ISSN: 1062-6050            Impact factor:   2.860


  20 in total

Review 1.  Examining diagnostic tests: an evidence-based perspective.

Authors:  J M Fritz; R S Wainner
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2001-09

Review 2.  A research agenda for licensing and certification testing validation studies.

Authors:  T M Haladyna
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.651

Review 3.  Pitfalls in the pursuit of objectivity: issues of validity, efficiency and acceptability.

Authors:  G R Norman; C P Van der Vleuten; E De Graaff
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 6.251

Review 4.  Pitfalls in the pursuit of objectivity: issues of reliability.

Authors:  C P Van der Vleuten; G R Norman; E De Graaff
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 6.251

5.  Assessment of clinical competence using objective structured examination.

Authors:  R M Harden; M Stevenson; W W Downie; G M Wilson
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1975-02-22

Review 6.  Clinical diagnosis of an anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anne Benjaminse; Alli Gokeler; Cees P van der Schans
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.751

7.  Reliability and validity of the objective structured clinical examination in assessing surgical residents.

Authors:  R Cohen; R K Reznick; B R Taylor; J Provan; A Rothman
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.565

8.  OSCE checklists do not capture increasing levels of expertise.

Authors:  B Hodges; G Regehr; N McNaughton; R Tiberius; M Hanson
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 6.893

9.  The intraclass correlation as a measure of interrater reliability of subjective judgments.

Authors:  G D Armstrong
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  1981 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.381

Review 10.  The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have a torn meniscus or ligament of the knee? Value of the physical examination.

Authors:  D H Solomon; D L Simel; D W Bates; J N Katz; J L Schaffer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-10-03       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  4 in total

1.  Between-rater reliability of the 6-minute walk test, berg balance scale, and handheld dynamometry in people with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Elaine Toomey; Susan Coote
Journal:  Int J MS Care       Date:  2013

2.  Accuracy and reliability of peer assessment of athletic training psychomotor laboratory skills.

Authors:  Melissa C Marty; Jolene M Henning; John T Willse
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Validity and reliability of the Standardized Orthopedic Assessment Tool (SOAT): a variation of the traditional objective structured clinical examination.

Authors:  Mark R Lafave; Larry Katz
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2014-02-17       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Concurrent Validation of the Banff Patella Instability Instrument to the Norwich Patellar Instability Score and the Kujala Score in Patients With Patellofemoral Instability.

Authors:  Laurie A Hiemstra; Sarah Kerslake; Mark Lafave; Nicholas G Mohtadi
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2016-05-11
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.