Literature DB >> 33842804

Psychometric Testing of the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) for Trainee-led, In Situ Simulations in the Pediatric Emergency Department Context.

Shiva Zargham1, Amy Hanson1, Megan Laniewicz1, Mary Sandquist1, David O Kessler2, Gregory E Gilbert3, Aaron W Calhoun1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Effective trainee-led debriefing after critical events in the pediatric emergency department has potential to improve patient care, but debriefing assessments for this context have not been developed. This study gathers preliminary validity and reliability evidence for the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) as an assessment of trainee-led post-critical event debriefing.
METHODS: Eight fellows led teams in three simulated critical events, each followed by a video-recorded discussion of performance mimicking impromptu debriefings occurring after real clinical events. Three raters assessed the recorded debriefings using the DASH, and their feedback was collated. Data were analyzed using generalizability theory, Gwet's AC2, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and coefficient alpha. Validity was examined using Messick's framework.
RESULTS: The DASH instrument had relatively low traditional inter-rater reliability (Gwet's AC2 = 0.24, single-rater ICC range = 0.16-0.35), with 30% fellow, 19% rater, and 23% rater by fellow variance. DASH generalizability (G) coefficient was 0.72, confirming inadequate reliability for research purposes. Decision (D) study results suggest the DASH can attain a G coefficient of 0.8 with five or more raters. Coefficient alpha was 0.95 for the DASH. A total of 90 and 40% of items from Elements 1 and 4, respectively, were deemed "not applicable" or left blank.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the DASH does not have sufficient validity and reliability to rigorously assess debriefing in the post-critical event environment but may be amenable to modification. Further development of the tool will be needed for optimal use in this context.
© 2020 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 33842804      PMCID: PMC8019148          DOI: 10.1002/aet2.10482

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AEM Educ Train        ISSN: 2472-5390


  24 in total

1.  Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessment data.

Authors:  Susan M Downing
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 6.251

2.  A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability.

Authors:  L GUTTMAN
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  1945       Impact factor: 2.500

Review 3.  The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning.

Authors:  Ruth M Fanning; David M Gaba
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.929

4.  Debriefing critical incidents in the paediatric emergency department: current practice and perceived needs in Australia and New Zealand.

Authors:  Theane Theophilos; Joanne Magyar; Franz E Babl
Journal:  Emerg Med Australas       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.151

5.  Generalizability theory for the perplexed: a practical introduction and guide: AMEE Guide No. 68.

Authors:  Ralph Bloch; Geoffrey Norman
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.650

6.  Debriefing assessment for simulation in healthcare: development and psychometric properties.

Authors:  Marisa Brett-Fleegler; Jenny Rudolph; Walter Eppich; Michael Monuteaux; Eric Fleegler; Adam Cheng; Robert Simon
Journal:  Simul Healthc       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.929

7.  National Survey of Pediatric Emergency Medicine Fellows on Debriefing After Medical Resuscitations.

Authors:  Lauren E Zinns; Karen J O'Connell; Paul C Mullan; Leticia M Ryan; Angela T Wratney
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.454

Review 8.  Rater training to support high-stakes simulation-based assessments.

Authors:  Moshe Feldman; Elizabeth H Lazzara; Allison A Vanderbilt; Deborah DiazGranados
Journal:  J Contin Educ Health Prof       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.355

9.  Implementation of an in situ qualitative debriefing tool for resuscitations.

Authors:  Paul C Mullan; Elizabeth Wuestner; Tarra D Kerr; Daniel P Christopher; Binita Patel
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 5.262

10.  Implementation of a Formal Debriefing Program After Pediatric Rapid Response Team Activations.

Authors:  Linda Aponte-Patel; Arash Salavitabar; Pamela Fazzio; Andrew S Geneslaw; Pamela Good; Anita I Sen
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2018-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.