PURPOSE: Technical proficiency in anesthesia has historically been determined subjectively. The purpose of this study was to establish the construct validity for the Imperial College Surgical Assessment Device (ICSAD), a measure of hand motion efficiency, as an objective assessment tool for technical skill performance, by examining its ability to distinguish between operators of different levels of experience performing a labour epidural. Concurrent validity for the ICSAD was investigated by comparison to a validated task specific checklist (CL) and global rating scale (GRS). METHODS: A single blinded, prospective, controlled study design compared three groups of subjects: novice residents (<30 epidurals), experienced residents (>100 epidurals), and staff anesthesiologists (>500 epidurals). Performance was measured using the ICSAD (number of movements, path length, time) and scores from a CL and GRS graded by examiners blinded to the level of training. Data were analyzed by multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). RESULTS: Twenty-nine subjects were recruited. Novice residents had longer path lengths compared to experienced residents (P = 0.031) and staff anesthesiologists (P = 0.0004), made more movements (P = 0.012) and took more time than staff (P = 0.009). Novice residents scored significantly worse on the GRS compared to experienced residents (P = 0.029) and staff (P = 0.01) and had significantly lower CL scores compared to staff (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Construct and concurrent validity for the ICSAD was established for a regional anesthesia technique by demonstrating that it can distinguish between operators of different levels of experience and by comparing it to the current standards of technical skill assessment.
PURPOSE: Technical proficiency in anesthesia has historically been determined subjectively. The purpose of this study was to establish the construct validity for the Imperial College Surgical Assessment Device (ICSAD), a measure of hand motion efficiency, as an objective assessment tool for technical skill performance, by examining its ability to distinguish between operators of different levels of experience performing a labour epidural. Concurrent validity for the ICSAD was investigated by comparison to a validated task specific checklist (CL) and global rating scale (GRS). METHODS: A single blinded, prospective, controlled study design compared three groups of subjects: novice residents (<30 epidurals), experienced residents (>100 epidurals), and staff anesthesiologists (>500 epidurals). Performance was measured using the ICSAD (number of movements, path length, time) and scores from a CL and GRS graded by examiners blinded to the level of training. Data were analyzed by multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). RESULTS: Twenty-nine subjects were recruited. Novice residents had longer path lengths compared to experienced residents (P = 0.031) and staff anesthesiologists (P = 0.0004), made more movements (P = 0.012) and took more time than staff (P = 0.009). Novice residents scored significantly worse on the GRS compared to experienced residents (P = 0.029) and staff (P = 0.01) and had significantly lower CL scores compared to staff (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Construct and concurrent validity for the ICSAD was established for a regional anesthesia technique by demonstrating that it can distinguish between operators of different levels of experience and by comparing it to the current standards of technical skill assessment.
Authors: J B Pagador; J Uson; M A Sánchez; J L Moyano; J Moreno; P Bustos; J Mateos; F M Sánchez-Margallo Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2010-08-11 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: J B Pagador; L F Sánchez; J A Sánchez; P Bustos; J Moreno; F M Sánchez-Margallo Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2010-07-02 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: José A Salvadó; Felipe Oyanedel; Sebastian Sepúlveda; Hernán Toledo; Álvaro Saavedra; Gaston Astroza; Lucas Consigliere Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: David P Azari; Lane L Frasier; Sudha R Pavuluri Quamme; Caprice C Greenberg; Carla M Pugh; Jacob A Greenberg; Robert G Radwin Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Daniel J Ackil; Amanda Toney; Ryan Good; David Ross; Rocco Germano; Linda Sabbadini; Molly Thiessen; Colin Bell; John L Kendall Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2020-12-15
Authors: Julián Varas; Pablo Achurra; Felipe León; Richard Castillo; Natalia De La Fuente; Rajesh Aggarwal; Leticia Clede; María P Bravo; Marcia Corvetto; Rodrigo Montaña Journal: Ann Surg Innov Res Date: 2016-02-12
Authors: Marcia A Corvetto; Carlos Fuentes; Andrea Araneda; Pablo Achurra; Pablo Miranda; Paola Viviani; Fernando R Altermatt Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 2.217