Thomas N Robinson1, Jaisa Olasky2, Patricia Young3, Liane S Feldman4, Pascal R Fuchshuber5, Stephanie B Jones6, Amin Madani4, Michael Brunt7, Dean Mikami8, Gretchen P Jackson9, Jessica Mischna10, Steven Schwaitzberg2, Daniel B Jones2. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA. thomas.robinson@ucdenver.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Kryterion, Phoenix, AZ, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 5. Department of Surgery, Kaiser Permanente, Walnut Creek, CA, USA. 6. Department of Anesthesiology, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. 8. Department of Surgery, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 9. Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. 10. Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy (FUSE) program includes a Web-based didactic curriculum and a high-stakes multiple-choice question examination with the goal to provide certification of knowledge on the safe use of surgical energy-based devices. The purpose of this study was (1) to set a passing score through a psychometrically sound process and (2) to determine what pretest factors predicted passing the FUSE examination. METHODS: Beta-testing of multiple-choice questions on 62 topics of importance to the safe use of surgical energy-based devices was performed. Eligible test takers were physicians with a minimum of 1 year of surgical training who were recruited by FUSE task force members. A pretest survey collected baseline information. RESULTS: A total of 227 individuals completed the FUSE beta-test, and 208 completed the pretest survey. The passing/cut score for the first test form of the FUSE multiple-choice examination was determined using the modified Angoff methodology and for the second test form was determined using a linear equating methodology. The overall passing rate across the two examination forms was 81.5%. Self-reported time studying the FUSE Web-based curriculum for a minimum of >2 h was associated with a passing examination score (p < 0.001). Performance was not different based on increased years of surgical practice (p = 0.363), self-reported expertise on one or more types of energy-based devices (p = 0.683), participation in the FUSE postgraduate course (p = 0.426), or having reviewed the FUSE manual (p = 0.428). Logistic regression found that studying the FUSE didactics for >2 h predicted a passing score (OR 3.61; 95% CI 1.44-9.05; p = 0.006) independent of the other baseline characteristics recorded. CONCLUSION(S): The development of the FUSE examination, including the passing score, followed a psychometrically sound process. Self-reported time studying the FUSE curriculum predicted a passing score independent of other pretest characteristics such as years in practice and self-reported expertise.
INTRODUCTION: The Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy (FUSE) program includes a Web-based didactic curriculum and a high-stakes multiple-choice question examination with the goal to provide certification of knowledge on the safe use of surgical energy-based devices. The purpose of this study was (1) to set a passing score through a psychometrically sound process and (2) to determine what pretest factors predicted passing the FUSE examination. METHODS: Beta-testing of multiple-choice questions on 62 topics of importance to the safe use of surgical energy-based devices was performed. Eligible test takers were physicians with a minimum of 1 year of surgical training who were recruited by FUSE task force members. A pretest survey collected baseline information. RESULTS: A total of 227 individuals completed the FUSE beta-test, and 208 completed the pretest survey. The passing/cut score for the first test form of the FUSE multiple-choice examination was determined using the modified Angoff methodology and for the second test form was determined using a linear equating methodology. The overall passing rate across the two examination forms was 81.5%. Self-reported time studying the FUSE Web-based curriculum for a minimum of >2 h was associated with a passing examination score (p < 0.001). Performance was not different based on increased years of surgical practice (p = 0.363), self-reported expertise on one or more types of energy-based devices (p = 0.683), participation in the FUSE postgraduate course (p = 0.426), or having reviewed the FUSE manual (p = 0.428). Logistic regression found that studying the FUSE didactics for >2 h predicted a passing score (OR 3.61; 95% CI 1.44-9.05; p = 0.006) independent of the other baseline characteristics recorded. CONCLUSION(S): The development of the FUSE examination, including the passing score, followed a psychometrically sound process. Self-reported time studying the FUSE curriculum predicted a passing score independent of other pretest characteristics such as years in practice and self-reported expertise.
Authors: Jeffrey H Peters; Gerald M Fried; Lee L Swanstrom; Nathaniel J Soper; Lelan F Sillin; Bruce Schirmer; Kaaren Hoffman Journal: Surgery Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Liane S Feldman; Pascal Fuchshuber; Daniel B Jones; Jessica Mischna; Steven D Schwaitzberg Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Benjamin K Poulose; Melina C Vassiliou; Brian J Dunkin; John D Mellinger; Robert D Fanelli; Jose M Martinez; Jeffrey W Hazey; Lelan F Sillin; Conor P Delaney; Vic Velanovich; Gerald M Fried; James R Korndorffer; Jeffrey M Marks Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Liane S Feldman; L Michael Brunt; Pascal Fuchshuber; Daniel B Jones; Stephanie B Jones; Jessica Mischna; Malcolm G Munro; Marc A Rozner; Steven D Schwaitzberg Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-07-17 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: P Fuchshuber; S Schwaitzberg; D Jones; S B Jones; L Feldman; M Munro; T Robinson; G Purcell-Jackson; D Mikami; A Madani; M Brunt; B Dunkin; C Gugliemi; L Groah; R Lim; J Mischna; C R Voyles Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Stephanie B Jones; Malcolm G Munro; Liane S Feldman; Thomas N Robinson; L Michael Brunt; Steven D Schwaitzberg; Daniel B Jones; Pascal R Fuchshuber Journal: Perm J Date: 2017