Danielle Hart1, Joseph Clinton1, Shilo Anders2, Troy Reihsen3, Mary Ann McNeil4, Gregory Rule5, Robert Sweet6. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, 701 Park Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55415. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1211 Medical Center Drive, Nashville, TN 37232. 3. SimPORTAL, University of Minnesota Medical Center, 500 Harvard Street, Minneapolis, MN 55455. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455. 5. Applied Research Associates, Inc., 950 Isom Road Suite 102, San Antonio, TX 78216. 6. Department of Urologic Surgery and SimPORTAL, University of Minnesota Medical Center, 500 Harvard Street, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is an important skill for all emergency providers; our ability to train and assess our learners is integral to providing optimal patient care. The primary aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability (IRR) and discriminant validity of a novel field ETI assessment tool using a checklist-derived performance score (PS) and critical failure (CF) rate. METHODS: Forty-three participants (18 paramedic students, 11 paramedics, and 14 emergency physicians [EPs]) performed ETI during a simulated trauma scenario on a pseudo-ventilated cadaver. Each participant was assessed by two experienced raters. IRR was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Regarding discriminant validity, a Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze PSs and a χ2 test was used for CFs. Mean global rating scale (GRS) scores were compared using an analysis of variance. RESULTS: The ETI assessment tool had excellent IRR, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94. There was a significant difference in PSs, CFs, and GRSs (p < 0.05) between cohorts. CONCLUSION: The novel field ETI assessment tool has excellent reliability among trained raters and discriminates between experienced ETI providers (EPs) and less experienced ETI performers using PSs, CFs, and GRSs on a fresh cadaveric model. Reprint &
OBJECTIVES: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is an important skill for all emergency providers; our ability to train and assess our learners is integral to providing optimal patient care. The primary aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability (IRR) and discriminant validity of a novel field ETI assessment tool using a checklist-derived performance score (PS) and critical failure (CF) rate. METHODS: Forty-three participants (18 paramedic students, 11 paramedics, and 14 emergency physicians [EPs]) performed ETI during a simulated trauma scenario on a pseudo-ventilated cadaver. Each participant was assessed by two experienced raters. IRR was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Regarding discriminant validity, a Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze PSs and a χ2 test was used for CFs. Mean global rating scale (GRS) scores were compared using an analysis of variance. RESULTS: The ETI assessment tool had excellent IRR, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94. There was a significant difference in PSs, CFs, and GRSs (p < 0.05) between cohorts. CONCLUSION: The novel field ETI assessment tool has excellent reliability among trained raters and discriminates between experienced ETI providers (EPs) and less experienced ETI performers using PSs, CFs, and GRSs on a fresh cadaveric model. Reprint &
Authors: Maria Del Carmen Usero-Pérez; Maria Lourdes Jiménez-Rodríguez; Alexandra González-Aguña; Valentín González-Alonso; Luis Orbañanos-Peiro; Jose María Santamaría-García; Jorge Luís Gómez-González Journal: Rev Lat Am Enfermagem Date: 2020-04-17
Authors: Nur-Ain Nadir; Danielle Hart; Michael Cassara; Joan Noelker; Tiffany Moadel; Miriam Kulkarni; Christopher S Sampson; Suzanne Bentley; Neel K Naik; Jessica Hernandez; Sara M Krzyzaniak; Steven Lai; Gregory Podolej; Christopher Strother Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2018-11-20