S Yule1,2,3,4, A Gupta3, D Gazarian1, A Geraghty5, D S Smink2,3,4, J Beard6, T Sundt4,7, G Youngson8, C McIlhenny5, S Paterson-Brown9. 1. STRATUS Center for Medical Simulation, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Scottish Centre for Simulation and Clinical Human Factors, Larbert, UK. 6. Faculty of Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 7. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Corrigan Minehan Heart Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 8. Department of Paediatric Surgery, Royal Aberdeen Children's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 9. Department of Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgeons' non-technical skills are an important part of surgical performance and surgical education. The most widely adopted assessment tool is the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) behaviour rating system. Psychometric analysis of this tool to date has focused on inter-rater reliability and feasibility rather than validation. METHODS: NOTSS assessments were collected from two groups of consultant/attending surgeons in the UK and USA, who rated behaviours of the lead surgeon during a video-based simulated crisis scenario after either online or classroom instruction. The process of validation consisted of assessing construct validity, scale reliability and concurrent criterion validity, and undertaking a sensitivity analysis. Central to this was confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate the structure of the NOTSS taxonomy. RESULTS: Some 255 consultant surgeons participated in the study. The four-category NOTSS model was found to have robust construct validity evidence, and a superior fit compared with alternative models. Logistic regression and sensitivity analysis revealed that, after adjusting for technical skills, for every 1-point increase in NOTSS score of the lead surgeon, the odds of having a higher versus lower patient safety score was 2·29 times. The same pattern of results was obtained for a broad mix of surgical specialties (UK) as well as a single discipline (cardiothoracic, USA). CONCLUSION: The NOTSS tool can be applied in research and education settings to measure non-technical skills in a valid and efficient manner.
BACKGROUND: Surgeons' non-technical skills are an important part of surgical performance and surgical education. The most widely adopted assessment tool is the Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS) behaviour rating system. Psychometric analysis of this tool to date has focused on inter-rater reliability and feasibility rather than validation. METHODS: NOTSS assessments were collected from two groups of consultant/attending surgeons in the UK and USA, who rated behaviours of the lead surgeon during a video-based simulated crisis scenario after either online or classroom instruction. The process of validation consisted of assessing construct validity, scale reliability and concurrent criterion validity, and undertaking a sensitivity analysis. Central to this was confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate the structure of the NOTSS taxonomy. RESULTS: Some 255 consultant surgeons participated in the study. The four-category NOTSS model was found to have robust construct validity evidence, and a superior fit compared with alternative models. Logistic regression and sensitivity analysis revealed that, after adjusting for technical skills, for every 1-point increase in NOTSS score of the lead surgeon, the odds of having a higher versus lower patient safety score was 2·29 times. The same pattern of results was obtained for a broad mix of surgical specialties (UK) as well as a single discipline (cardiothoracic, USA). CONCLUSION: The NOTSS tool can be applied in research and education settings to measure non-technical skills in a valid and efficient manner.
Authors: Roger D Dias; Lauren R Kennedy-Metz; Steven J Yule; Matthew Gombolay; Marco A Zenati Journal: IEEE Conf Cogn Comput Asp Situat Manag Date: 2022-07-22
Authors: Roger D Dias; William Riley; Kenneth Shann; Donald S Likosky; David Fitzgerald; Steven Yule Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2021-07-02 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Michael R Mathis; Steven Yule; Xiaoting Wu; Roger D Dias; Allison M Janda; Sarah L Krein; Milisa Manojlovich; Matthew D Caldwell; Korana Stakich-Alpirez; Min Zhang; Jason Corso; Nathan Louis; Tongbo Xu; Jeremy Wolverton; Francis D Pagani; Donald S Likosky Journal: Surgery Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 4.348
Authors: Joanne G Abi-Jaoudé; Lauren R Kennedy-Metz; Roger D Dias; Steven J Yule; Marco A Zenati Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 13.787
Authors: Cora Griffin; Abdullatif Aydın; Oliver Brunckhorst; Nicholas Raison; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 4.226