David A Burckett-St Laurent1, Ahtsham U Niazi, Melissa S Cunningham, Melanie Jaeger, Sherif Abbas, Jason McVicar, Vincent W Chan. 1. From the *Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, and †Temerty/Chang International Centre for Telesimulation and Innovation in Medical Education, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and ‡Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to establish construct and concurrent validity and interrater reliability of an assessment tool for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (UGRA) performance on a high-fidelity simulation model. METHODS: Twenty participants were evaluated using a Checklist and Global Rating Scale designed for assessing any UGRA block. The participants performed an ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block on both a patient and a simulator. Evaluations were completed in-person by an expert and remotely by a blinded expert using video recordings. Using previous number of blocks performed as an indication of expertise, participants were divided into Novice (n = 8) and Experienced (n = 12) groups. Construct validity was assessed through the tool's reliable on-site and remote discrimination of Novice and Experienced anesthetists. Concurrent validity was established by comparisons of patient versus simulator scoring. Finally, interrater reliability was determined by comparing the scores of on-site and off-site evaluators. RESULTS: The Global Rating Scale was able to differentiate Novice from Experienced anesthetists both by on-site and remote assessment on a patient and simulation model. The Checklist was unable to discern the 2 groups on a simulation model remotely and was marginally significant with on-site scoring. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate the validity and reliability of a Global Rating Scale assessment tool for use in UGRA simulation training. Although the checklist may require further refinement, the Global Rating Scale can be used for remote and on-site assessment of UGRA skills.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to establish construct and concurrent validity and interrater reliability of an assessment tool for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (UGRA) performance on a high-fidelity simulation model. METHODS: Twenty participants were evaluated using a Checklist and Global Rating Scale designed for assessing any UGRA block. The participants performed an ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block on both a patient and a simulator. Evaluations were completed in-person by an expert and remotely by a blinded expert using video recordings. Using previous number of blocks performed as an indication of expertise, participants were divided into Novice (n = 8) and Experienced (n = 12) groups. Construct validity was assessed through the tool's reliable on-site and remote discrimination of Novice and Experienced anesthetists. Concurrent validity was established by comparisons of patient versus simulator scoring. Finally, interrater reliability was determined by comparing the scores of on-site and off-site evaluators. RESULTS: The Global Rating Scale was able to differentiate Novice from Experienced anesthetists both by on-site and remote assessment on a patient and simulation model. The Checklist was unable to discern the 2 groups on a simulation model remotely and was marginally significant with on-site scoring. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate the validity and reliability of a Global Rating Scale assessment tool for use in UGRA simulation training. Although the checklist may require further refinement, the Global Rating Scale can be used for remote and on-site assessment of UGRA skills.
Authors: Karthikeyan Kallidaikurichi Srinivasan; Anthony Gallagher; Niall O'Brien; Vinod Sudir; Nick Barrett; Raymund O'Connor; Francesca Holt; Peter Lee; Brian O'Donnell; George Shorten Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Ebor Jacob G James; Siva Vyasam; Shakthi Venkatachalam; Elizabeth Sanseau; Kyle Cassidy; Geethanjali Ramachandra; Grace Rebekah; Debasis D Adhikari; Ellen Deutsch; Akira Nishisaki; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 3.569