Beyond the Block: Development of an Assessment Tool to Evaluate Periprocedural and Communication Skills in Regional Anesthesia.

Andres F Rojas, Fei Chen, Daniel McMillan, Xinming An, Robert Isaak, Maxwell Jolly, Jennifer Allan, Randall Coombs, Monika Nanda, Stuart A Grant
{"title":"Beyond the Block: Development of an Assessment Tool to Evaluate Periprocedural and Communication Skills in Regional Anesthesia.","authors":"Andres F Rojas, Fei Chen, Daniel McMillan, Xinming An, Robert Isaak, Maxwell Jolly, Jennifer Allan, Randall Coombs, Monika Nanda, Stuart A Grant","doi":"10.46374/VolXXVII_Issue1_Rojas","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) allows for residency training programs to assess clinical competencies. OSCEs can assess periprocedural skills but are challenging to implement because of their cost and time-intensive nature, especially in subspecialty areas such as regional anesthesia. The objective of this pilot project was to develop and implement an OSCE to assess important competencies in the field of regional anesthesia with focus on periprocedural and communication skills such as the ability to obtain informed consent, select appropriate equipment, and manage complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three scenarios were developed after a needs assessment of the institution's regional anesthesia curriculum. No injections were performed, and focus was given to competencies required for effective and safe regional anesthesia practice outside of procedure-specific and technical competencies. We describe the development of the scenarios, exam format, setting and performance, and development of the scoring tool. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the reliability of the project by measuring interrater reliability and internal consistency reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three scenarios were developed with a grading tool containing 64 checklist items and 5 global rating scores. Sixty-one percent of checklist items (39 of 64) showed moderate or better interrater reliability and all global rating scores showed moderate or better agreement. All scenarios showed moderate or better internal consistency reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This pilot project details the development of a regional anesthesia OSCE that offers a valid, reliable, reproducible, cost-effective, and feasible method to assess periprocedural and communication competencies required for successful regional anesthesia practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":75067,"journal":{"name":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","volume":"27 1","pages":"E743"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11978219/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46374/VolXXVII_Issue1_Rojas","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) allows for residency training programs to assess clinical competencies. OSCEs can assess periprocedural skills but are challenging to implement because of their cost and time-intensive nature, especially in subspecialty areas such as regional anesthesia. The objective of this pilot project was to develop and implement an OSCE to assess important competencies in the field of regional anesthesia with focus on periprocedural and communication skills such as the ability to obtain informed consent, select appropriate equipment, and manage complications.

Methods: Three scenarios were developed after a needs assessment of the institution's regional anesthesia curriculum. No injections were performed, and focus was given to competencies required for effective and safe regional anesthesia practice outside of procedure-specific and technical competencies. We describe the development of the scenarios, exam format, setting and performance, and development of the scoring tool. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the reliability of the project by measuring interrater reliability and internal consistency reliability.

Results: Three scenarios were developed with a grading tool containing 64 checklist items and 5 global rating scores. Sixty-one percent of checklist items (39 of 64) showed moderate or better interrater reliability and all global rating scores showed moderate or better agreement. All scenarios showed moderate or better internal consistency reliability.

Conclusions: This pilot project details the development of a regional anesthesia OSCE that offers a valid, reliable, reproducible, cost-effective, and feasible method to assess periprocedural and communication competencies required for successful regional anesthesia practice.

超越障碍:开发评估区域麻醉围手术期和沟通技巧的评估工具。
背景:客观结构化临床检查(OSCE)允许住院医师培训计划评估临床能力。osce可以评估围手术期技能,但由于其成本和时间密集的性质,特别是在区域麻醉等亚专业领域,实施起来具有挑战性。该试点项目的目标是制定和实施欧安组织评估区域麻醉领域的重要能力,重点是围手术期和沟通技巧,如获得知情同意、选择适当设备和处理并发症的能力。方法:在对该机构的区域麻醉课程进行需求评估后,制定了三种方案。没有进行注射,重点放在有效和安全的区域麻醉实践所需的能力之外的特定程序和技术能力。我们描述了场景的发展,考试形式,设置和性能,以及计分工具的发展。采用统计分析方法,通过测量项目间信度和内部一致性信度来评价项目的可靠性。结果:使用包含64个检查表项目和5个全局评分的评分工具开发了三个场景。61%的清单项目(64个中的39个)显示出中等或更好的互认信度,所有的总体评级得分显示出中等或更好的一致性。所有场景均表现出中等或更好的内部一致性可靠性。结论:本试点项目详细介绍了区域麻醉OSCE的发展,为评估成功区域麻醉实践所需的围手术期和沟通能力提供了一种有效、可靠、可重复、具有成本效益和可行的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信