BACKGROUND: There have been several attempts to systematically assess performance in bronchoscopy. Earlier validation studies have used bronchoscopy simulators, not real-life performance in patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the reliability and validity of an assessment tool aimed for the use in a clinical setting. METHODS: Five junior residents, 5 senior residents and 9 consultants performed 3 bronchoscopies each. All 57 bronchoscopies were video-recorded and assessed blindly and independently by two bronchoscopy experts using the new assessment tool. RESULTS: The interrater reliability was high, with Cronbach's α = 0.86. Assessment of 3 bronchoscopies by a single rater had a generalizability coefficient of 0.84. The correlation between experience and performance was good (Pearson correlation = 0.76). There were significant differences between the groups for all aspects of the assessment, but post hoc tests showed different discriminative abilities. CONCLUSIONS: This new tool for assessing clinical bronchoscopy performance has a high interrater reliability. One rater assessing performance of 3 bronchoscopies ensures sufficient reliability. The assessment tool demonstrated sufficient construct validity.
BACKGROUND: There have been several attempts to systematically assess performance in bronchoscopy. Earlier validation studies have used bronchoscopy simulators, not real-life performance in patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the reliability and validity of an assessment tool aimed for the use in a clinical setting. METHODS: Five junior residents, 5 senior residents and 9 consultants performed 3 bronchoscopies each. All 57 bronchoscopies were video-recorded and assessed blindly and independently by two bronchoscopy experts using the new assessment tool. RESULTS: The interrater reliability was high, with Cronbach's α = 0.86. Assessment of 3 bronchoscopies by a single rater had a generalizability coefficient of 0.84. The correlation between experience and performance was good (Pearson correlation = 0.76). There were significant differences between the groups for all aspects of the assessment, but post hoc tests showed different discriminative abilities. CONCLUSIONS: This new tool for assessing clinical bronchoscopy performance has a high interrater reliability. One rater assessing performance of 3 bronchoscopies ensures sufficient reliability. The assessment tool demonstrated sufficient construct validity.
Authors: Lars Konge; Per Lehnert; Henrik Jessen Hansen; René Horsleben Petersen; Charlotte Ringsted Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-12-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jacob Melchiors; K Petersen; T Todsen; A Bohr; Lars Konge; Christian von Buchwald Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Louise Preisler; Morten Bo Søndergaard Svendsen; Bo Søndergaard; Lene Brink; Tyge Nordentoft; Lars Bo Svendsen; Lars Konge Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2016-11-17