Rubric Evaluation of Pediatric Emergency Medicine Fellows

Hsu, Deborah; Macias, Charles G.

doi:10.4300/jgme-d-10-00083.1

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 Some authors have attempted to describe this and similar models within the context of medical education and provide a picture of how this might be adapted to orthopaedic technical skill assessment. 4,7,8,19 In an effort to allow some standardization within the overall assessment of surgical competency, the ASSET was designed to follow this rubric (Table 4). 6,8,10 It must be stated that controversy exists regarding how best to apply the Dreyfus model to medical education, and further work is necessary in this area.…”

Section: Advanced Beginnermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET)

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Surgeries employing arthroscopic techniques are among the most commonly performed in orthopaedic clinical practice however, valid and reliable methods of assessing the arthroscopic skill of orthopaedic surgeons are lacking. Hypothesis The Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) will demonstrate content validity, concurrent criterion-oriented validity, and reliability, when used to assess the technical ability of surgeons performing diagnostic knee arthroscopy on cadaveric specimens. Study Design Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3 Methods Content validity was determined by a group of seven experts using a Delphi process. Intra-articular performance of a right and left diagnostic knee arthroscopy was recorded for twenty-eight residents and two sports medicine fellowship trained attending surgeons. Subject performance was assessed by two blinded raters using the ASSET. Concurrent criterion-oriented validity, inter-rater reliability, and test-retest reliability were evaluated. Results Content validity: The content development group identified 8 arthroscopic skill domains to evaluate using the ASSET. Concurrent criterion-oriented validity: Significant differences in total ASSET score (p<0.05) between novice, intermediate, and advanced experience groups were identified. Inter-rater reliability: The ASSET scores assigned by each rater were strongly correlated (r=0.91, p <0.01) and the intra-class correlation coefficient between raters for the total ASSET score was 0.90. Test-retest reliability: there was a significant correlation between ASSET scores for both procedures attempted by each individual (r = 0.79, p<0.01). Conclusion The ASSET appears to be a useful, valid, and reliable method for assessing surgeon performance of diagnostic knee arthroscopy in cadaveric specimens. Studies are ongoing to determine its generalizability to other procedures as well as to the live OR and other simulated environments.

show abstract

Section: Advanced Beginnermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Arthroscopic Surgical Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET)

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there are procedural competency standards for physician trainees, there are no defined standards for faculty in most specialties 1,2 . In many specialties, trainees need to perform or supervise a threshold number of specific procedures before graduation, which can include those performed in a simulated setting.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there are procedural competency standards for physician trainees, there are no defined standards for faculty in most specialties. 1,2 In many specialties, trainees need to perform or supervise a threshold number of specific procedures before graduation, which can include those performed in a simulated setting. Adult emergency medicine, for example, has clearly defined standards for numbers of procedures needed during residency determined by the Residency Review Committee.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Trains the Trainers?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesAttending physicians in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) must be able to perform lifesaving procedures, yet guidelines for maintaining procedural competency do not exist. We implemented a biannual 2-hour “bootcamp” designed to help PEM faculty maintain procedural competency.MethodsA survey-based needs assessment was used to create a set of goals and objectives for the session and determine which procedural skills to include. Sessions of 4 simulated skills were held twice a year and limited to 12 faculty. Post-bootcamp evaluations were administered at the 1-year and 6-year marks to evaluate the usefulness of the training.ResultsTwenty-eight of our 55 current faculty members (50%) responded to the 6-year follow-up evaluation. Overall, the bootcamp was felt to be beneficial, with 64% of faculty rating it “great” (5) or “highly useful” (6) on a 6-point Likert scale. The majority of participants also rated the airway, vascular access, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation/defibrillator training favorably. Faculty who later had the opportunity to perform specific resuscitation procedures clinically felt that the circulation (cardiopulmonary resuscitation/defibrillator) and airway stations contributed to the success of their procedure performance.ConclusionsThe clinical setting alone may be insufficient in maintaining procedural competency in lifesaving skills in PEM. Giving faculty the opportunity to practice these skills is feasible and can be effective in increasing confidence. Future training sessions should aim toward practicing to a defined mastery level.

show abstract