INTRODUCTION: Real-time assessment of operator performance during procedural simulation is a common practice that requires undivided attention by 1 or more reviewers, potentially over many repetitions of the same case. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether reviewers display better interrater agreement of procedural competency when observing recorded, rather than live, performance; and to develop an assessment tool for pediatric rapid sequence intubation (pRSI). METHODS: A framework of a previously established Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) tool was modified for pRSI. Emergency medicine residents (postgraduate year 1-4) were prospectively enrolled in a pRSI simulation scenario and evaluated by 2 live raters using the modified tool. Sessions were videotaped and reviewed by the same raters at least 4 months later. Raters were blinded to their initial rating. Interrater agreement was determined by using the Krippendorff generalized concordance method. RESULTS: Overall interrater agreement for live review was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.78) and for video was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.82). Live review was significantly superior to video review in only 1 of the OSATS domains (Preparation) and was equivalent in the other domains. Intrarater agreement between the live and video evaluation was very good, greater than 0.75 for all raters, with a mean of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.85). CONCLUSION: The modified OSATS assessment tool demonstrated some evidence of validity in discriminating among levels of resident experience and high interreviewer reliability. With this tool, intrareviewer reliability was high between live and 4-months' delayed video review of the simulated procedure, which supports feasibility of delayed video review in resident assessment.
INTRODUCTION: Real-time assessment of operator performance during procedural simulation is a common practice that requires undivided attention by 1 or more reviewers, potentially over many repetitions of the same case. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether reviewers display better interrater agreement of procedural competency when observing recorded, rather than live, performance; and to develop an assessment tool for pediatric rapid sequence intubation (pRSI). METHODS: A framework of a previously established Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) tool was modified for pRSI. Emergency medicine residents (postgraduate year 1-4) were prospectively enrolled in a pRSI simulation scenario and evaluated by 2 live raters using the modified tool. Sessions were videotaped and reviewed by the same raters at least 4 months later. Raters were blinded to their initial rating. Interrater agreement was determined by using the Krippendorff generalized concordance method. RESULTS: Overall interrater agreement for live review was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.78) and for video was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.82). Live review was significantly superior to video review in only 1 of the OSATS domains (Preparation) and was equivalent in the other domains. Intrarater agreement between the live and video evaluation was very good, greater than 0.75 for all raters, with a mean of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.85). CONCLUSION: The modified OSATS assessment tool demonstrated some evidence of validity in discriminating among levels of resident experience and high interreviewer reliability. With this tool, intrareviewer reliability was high between live and 4-months' delayed video review of the simulated procedure, which supports feasibility of delayed video review in resident assessment.
Authors: Philip Shayne; Fiona Gallahue; Stephan Rinnert; Craig L Anderson; Gene Hern; Eric Katz Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2006-04-24 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Marisa B Brett-Fleegler; Robert J Vinci; Debra L Weiner; Sion Kim Harris; Mei-Chiung Shih; Monica E Kleinman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2008-02-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Joseph LaMantia; Bryan Kane; Lalena Yarris; Anthony Tadros; Mary Frances Ward; Martin Lesser; Philip Shayne Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Kulsoom Laeeq; Scott Infusino; Sandra Y Lin; Douglas D Reh; Masaru Ishii; Jean Kim; Andrew P Lane; Nasir I Bhatti Journal: Am J Rhinol Allergy Date: 2009-12-16 Impact factor: 2.467
Authors: Mark D Adler; John A Vozenilek; Jennifer L Trainor; Walter J Eppich; Ernest E Wang; Jennifer L Beaumont; Pamela R Aitchison; Paul J Pribaz; Timothy Erickson; Marcia Edison; William C McGaghie Journal: Simul Healthc Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 1.929
Authors: Jessica L Sparks; Dustin L Crouch; Kathryn Sobba; Douglas Evans; Jing Zhang; James E Johnson; Ian Saunders; John Thomas; Sarah Bodin; Ashley Tonidandel; Jeff Carter; Carl Westcott; R Shayn Martin; Amy Hildreth Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Mary E W Dankbaar; Karen M Stegers-Jager; Frank Baarveld; Jeroen J G van Merrienboer; Geoff R Norman; Frans L Rutten; Jan L C M van Saase; Stephanie C E Schuit Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 3.240