Jason A Jones,Trevor W Tobin,Maria C Bermudez,Gregory L Braden,Evan Fisher,Nupur Gupta,Daniel Landry,Christopher LeBrun,Robert Nee,Bret Pasiuk,Christina M Yuan
{"title":"家庭血液透析目的结构化临床检查(OSCE)对肾脏病研究员形成性评估。","authors":"Jason A Jones,Trevor W Tobin,Maria C Bermudez,Gregory L Braden,Evan Fisher,Nupur Gupta,Daniel Landry,Christopher LeBrun,Robert Nee,Bret Pasiuk,Christina M Yuan","doi":"10.2215/cjn.0000000740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nThe Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires graduating nephrology fellows demonstrate competence in home hemodialysis (HHD). Because low patient numbers may lead to training gaps, clinical experience may be enhanced using simulation. We designed and preliminarily validated a formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessing clinical care of an uncomplicated patient initiating HHD, using a unified model of construct validity.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThe OSCE was developed by a nephrology fellow and five faculty (three practicing HHD). The nine-member test committee (five in HHD practice; one HHD care partner) assessed test item difficulty/relevance and determined passing scores. The final test consisted of 27 items (31 possible points); seven were evidence-based/standard-of-care questions (9.5 possible points). Passing score was 20 out of 31 points (65%). Median relevance for all items was \"important\" or \"essential\". Content validity index was 0.84. On preliminary validation by 11 board-certified volunteers (four practicing HHD), overall mean±SD score was 27.5±2 (100% passing); kappa=0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.99]. Validator evidence-based question score was 9.0 ± 0.6 .\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThirty-eight fellows (nine programs, 21 first-year; 17 second-year) were tested. Seventy one percent passed (Cronbach's alpha=0.70). Fellows' mean±SD scores were lower than validators: 21.5±4.0 vs. 27.5±2, p<0.001, as were their scores on evidence-based questions: 7.4±1.4 vs. 9.0±0.6, p<0.001. Eighty-eight percent of evidence-based/standard-of-care questions were answered correctly by validators vs. 62% by fellows; p <0.001. Forty-two percent of fellows were able to name four potential benefits and two risks associated with HHD; 79% recognized that the primary risk of buttonhole cannulation was infection. Seventy-four percent correctly identified minimum single pool Kt/V for thrice-weekly hemodialysis, and 29% knew the minimum standard weekly Kt/V target. Eighty-eight percent of fellows surveyed (22 out of 25) agreed/strongly agreed that the OSCE was useful in self-assessing proficiency.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nThe OSCE may be used as a formative assessment of fellow proficiency in prescribing HHD.","PeriodicalId":50681,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Home Hemodialysis Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) for Formative Assessment of Nephrology Fellows.\",\"authors\":\"Jason A Jones,Trevor W Tobin,Maria C Bermudez,Gregory L Braden,Evan Fisher,Nupur Gupta,Daniel Landry,Christopher LeBrun,Robert Nee,Bret Pasiuk,Christina M Yuan\",\"doi\":\"10.2215/cjn.0000000740\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nThe Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires graduating nephrology fellows demonstrate competence in home hemodialysis (HHD). Because low patient numbers may lead to training gaps, clinical experience may be enhanced using simulation. We designed and preliminarily validated a formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessing clinical care of an uncomplicated patient initiating HHD, using a unified model of construct validity.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nThe OSCE was developed by a nephrology fellow and five faculty (three practicing HHD). The nine-member test committee (five in HHD practice; one HHD care partner) assessed test item difficulty/relevance and determined passing scores. The final test consisted of 27 items (31 possible points); seven were evidence-based/standard-of-care questions (9.5 possible points). Passing score was 20 out of 31 points (65%). Median relevance for all items was \\\"important\\\" or \\\"essential\\\". Content validity index was 0.84. On preliminary validation by 11 board-certified volunteers (four practicing HHD), overall mean±SD score was 27.5±2 (100% passing); kappa=0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.99]. Validator evidence-based question score was 9.0 ± 0.6 .\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nThirty-eight fellows (nine programs, 21 first-year; 17 second-year) were tested. Seventy one percent passed (Cronbach's alpha=0.70). Fellows' mean±SD scores were lower than validators: 21.5±4.0 vs. 27.5±2, p<0.001, as were their scores on evidence-based questions: 7.4±1.4 vs. 9.0±0.6, p<0.001. Eighty-eight percent of evidence-based/standard-of-care questions were answered correctly by validators vs. 62% by fellows; p <0.001. Forty-two percent of fellows were able to name four potential benefits and two risks associated with HHD; 79% recognized that the primary risk of buttonhole cannulation was infection. Seventy-four percent correctly identified minimum single pool Kt/V for thrice-weekly hemodialysis, and 29% knew the minimum standard weekly Kt/V target. Eighty-eight percent of fellows surveyed (22 out of 25) agreed/strongly agreed that the OSCE was useful in self-assessing proficiency.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nThe OSCE may be used as a formative assessment of fellow proficiency in prescribing HHD.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.0000000740\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.0000000740","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Home Hemodialysis Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) for Formative Assessment of Nephrology Fellows.
BACKGROUND
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires graduating nephrology fellows demonstrate competence in home hemodialysis (HHD). Because low patient numbers may lead to training gaps, clinical experience may be enhanced using simulation. We designed and preliminarily validated a formative objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessing clinical care of an uncomplicated patient initiating HHD, using a unified model of construct validity.
METHODS
The OSCE was developed by a nephrology fellow and five faculty (three practicing HHD). The nine-member test committee (five in HHD practice; one HHD care partner) assessed test item difficulty/relevance and determined passing scores. The final test consisted of 27 items (31 possible points); seven were evidence-based/standard-of-care questions (9.5 possible points). Passing score was 20 out of 31 points (65%). Median relevance for all items was "important" or "essential". Content validity index was 0.84. On preliminary validation by 11 board-certified volunteers (four practicing HHD), overall mean±SD score was 27.5±2 (100% passing); kappa=0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.99]. Validator evidence-based question score was 9.0 ± 0.6 .
RESULTS
Thirty-eight fellows (nine programs, 21 first-year; 17 second-year) were tested. Seventy one percent passed (Cronbach's alpha=0.70). Fellows' mean±SD scores were lower than validators: 21.5±4.0 vs. 27.5±2, p<0.001, as were their scores on evidence-based questions: 7.4±1.4 vs. 9.0±0.6, p<0.001. Eighty-eight percent of evidence-based/standard-of-care questions were answered correctly by validators vs. 62% by fellows; p <0.001. Forty-two percent of fellows were able to name four potential benefits and two risks associated with HHD; 79% recognized that the primary risk of buttonhole cannulation was infection. Seventy-four percent correctly identified minimum single pool Kt/V for thrice-weekly hemodialysis, and 29% knew the minimum standard weekly Kt/V target. Eighty-eight percent of fellows surveyed (22 out of 25) agreed/strongly agreed that the OSCE was useful in self-assessing proficiency.
CONCLUSIONS
The OSCE may be used as a formative assessment of fellow proficiency in prescribing HHD.
期刊介绍:
The Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology strives to establish itself as the foremost authority in communicating and influencing advances in clinical nephrology by (1) swiftly and effectively disseminating pivotal developments in clinical and translational research in nephrology, encompassing innovations in research methods and care delivery; (2) providing context for these advances in relation to future research directions and patient care; and (3) becoming a key voice on issues with potential implications for the clinical practice of nephrology, particularly within the United States. Original manuscript topics cover a range of areas, including Acid/Base and Electrolyte Disorders, Acute Kidney Injury and ICU Nephrology, Chronic Kidney Disease, Clinical Nephrology, Cystic Kidney Disease, Diabetes and the Kidney, Genetics, Geriatric and Palliative Nephrology, Glomerular and Tubulointerstitial Diseases, Hypertension, Maintenance Dialysis, Mineral Metabolism, Nephrolithiasis, and Transplantation.