BACKGROUND: Determining procedural competence requires psychometrically sound assessment tools. A variety of instruments are available to determine procedural performance for central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, but it is not clear which ones should be used in the context of competency-based medical education. OBJECTIVE: We compared several commonly used instruments to determine which should be preferentially used to assess competence in CVC insertion. METHODS: Junior residents completing their first intensive care unit rotation between July 31, 2006, and March 9, 2007, were video-recorded performing CVC insertion on task trainer mannequins. Between June 1, 2016, and September 30, 2016, 3 experienced raters judged procedural competence on the historical video recordings of resident performance using 4 separate tools, including an itemized checklist, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), a critical error assessment tool, and the Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE). Generalizability theory (G-theory) was used to compare the performance characteristics among the tools. A decision study predicted the optimal testing environment using the tools. RESULTS: At the time of the original recording, 127 residents rotated through intensive care units at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Seventy-seven of them (61%) met inclusion criteria, and 55 of those residents (71%) agreed to participate. Results from the generalizability study (G-study) demonstrated that scores from O-SCORE and OSATS were the most dependable. Dependability could be maintained for O-SCORE and OSATS with 2 raters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that global rating scales, such as the OSATS or the O-SCORE tools, should be preferentially utilized for assessment of competence in CVC insertion.
BACKGROUND: Determining procedural competence requires psychometrically sound assessment tools. A variety of instruments are available to determine procedural performance for central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, but it is not clear which ones should be used in the context of competency-based medical education. OBJECTIVE: We compared several commonly used instruments to determine which should be preferentially used to assess competence in CVC insertion. METHODS: Junior residents completing their first intensive care unit rotation between July 31, 2006, and March 9, 2007, were video-recorded performing CVC insertion on task trainer mannequins. Between June 1, 2016, and September 30, 2016, 3 experienced raters judged procedural competence on the historical video recordings of resident performance using 4 separate tools, including an itemized checklist, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), a critical error assessment tool, and the Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE). Generalizability theory (G-theory) was used to compare the performance characteristics among the tools. A decision study predicted the optimal testing environment using the tools. RESULTS: At the time of the original recording, 127 residents rotated through intensive care units at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Seventy-seven of them (61%) met inclusion criteria, and 55 of those residents (71%) agreed to participate. Results from the generalizability study (G-study) demonstrated that scores from O-SCORE and OSATS were the most dependable. Dependability could be maintained for O-SCORE and OSATS with 2 raters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that global rating scales, such as the OSATS or the O-SCORE tools, should be preferentially utilized for assessment of competence in CVC insertion.
Authors: L Bishop; L Dougherty; A Bodenham; J Mansi; P Crowe; C Kibbler; M Shannon; J Treleaven Journal: Int J Lab Hematol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: Ashley See; Michael Pallaci; Adam R Aluisio; Jenny Beck-Esmay; Michael Menchine; Michael Weinstock; Chun Nok Lam; Jeff Riddell Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-02-01