院前复苏技能的有效评估工具的发展和批评

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Amy E. Seymour-Walsh
{"title":"院前复苏技能的有效评估工具的发展和批评","authors":"Amy E. Seymour-Walsh","doi":"10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to describe the development of clinically credible skill practice and assessment guides for intraosseous (IO) needle insertion and laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion as two essential components of advanced life support (ALS) training.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA modified Delphi approach was used to determine expert consensus in the application of IO and LMA devices for the pre-hospital and emergency setting. Nine pre-hospital clinical specialists were recruited to participate in this Delphi study to determine consensus of clinical expert practice.\n\n\nFindings\nTwo rounds were required to obtain a performance and assessment checklist for each skill. Both lists were then further modified to maximise their useability. However, the development of a “validated” checklist using a pre-determined process such as a Delphi approach is challenged. Rather, the implementation of these tools in a stated context, and analysis of the data they generate, is an essential aspect of validation which the Delphi approach does not address.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nParticipant feedback regarding the rationale for their scores was limited in this study in order to minimise participant input and maximise completion of all rounds of the study. Further, devices used in the study may no longer be first-line choices with the advent of more modern devices including semi-automatic IO devices and LMAs which do not have inflatable cuffs. The refined checklists are able to be adapted to these newer devices.\n\n\nPractical implications\nPre-hospital education contexts which may not have access to expert assessors who are skilled in providing global judgements now have access to clinically relevant skill-specific assessment tools for IO and LMA insertion.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWorldwide, ALS accreditation and competence is demanded of countless health professionals, and to date, validated practice and assessment guides specifically developed for the emergency setting for which they are used, are not available in the published literature. This paper proposes to fill that gap, in addition to guiding clinical education researchers in strategies to develop valid assessment tools through rigorous critique.\n","PeriodicalId":44087,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Emergency Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The development and critique of validated assessment tools for pre-hospital resuscitation skills\",\"authors\":\"Amy E. Seymour-Walsh\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to describe the development of clinically credible skill practice and assessment guides for intraosseous (IO) needle insertion and laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion as two essential components of advanced life support (ALS) training.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA modified Delphi approach was used to determine expert consensus in the application of IO and LMA devices for the pre-hospital and emergency setting. Nine pre-hospital clinical specialists were recruited to participate in this Delphi study to determine consensus of clinical expert practice.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nTwo rounds were required to obtain a performance and assessment checklist for each skill. Both lists were then further modified to maximise their useability. However, the development of a “validated” checklist using a pre-determined process such as a Delphi approach is challenged. Rather, the implementation of these tools in a stated context, and analysis of the data they generate, is an essential aspect of validation which the Delphi approach does not address.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nParticipant feedback regarding the rationale for their scores was limited in this study in order to minimise participant input and maximise completion of all rounds of the study. Further, devices used in the study may no longer be first-line choices with the advent of more modern devices including semi-automatic IO devices and LMAs which do not have inflatable cuffs. The refined checklists are able to be adapted to these newer devices.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nPre-hospital education contexts which may not have access to expert assessors who are skilled in providing global judgements now have access to clinically relevant skill-specific assessment tools for IO and LMA insertion.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nWorldwide, ALS accreditation and competence is demanded of countless health professionals, and to date, validated practice and assessment guides specifically developed for the emergency setting for which they are used, are not available in the published literature. This paper proposes to fill that gap, in addition to guiding clinical education researchers in strategies to develop valid assessment tools through rigorous critique.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Emergency Services\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Emergency Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Emergency Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJES-03-2018-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:本文的目的是描述骨内(IO)针插入和喉罩气道(LMA)插入作为高级生命支持(ALS)训练的两个重要组成部分的临床可信的技能实践和评估指南的发展。设计/方法/方法采用改进的德尔菲法来确定在院前和急诊环境中应用IO和LMA设备的专家共识。招募9名院前临床专家参与德尔菲研究,以确定临床专家实践的共识。需要两轮才能获得每项技能的表现和评估清单。然后进一步修改这两个列表,以最大限度地提高它们的可用性。然而,使用预先确定的过程(如德尔菲方法)开发“经过验证的”检查表面临挑战。相反,在规定的上下文中实现这些工具,并对它们生成的数据进行分析,是验证的一个重要方面,这是Delphi方法无法解决的。研究的局限性/意义在这项研究中,为了尽量减少参与者的投入,最大限度地完成所有轮的研究,参与者关于他们得分的基本原理的反馈是有限的。此外,随着更现代设备的出现,包括半自动IO设备和没有充气袖口的lma,研究中使用的设备可能不再是一线选择。改进的检查表能够适应这些较新的设备。实际意义院前教育环境可能无法获得熟练提供全面判断的专家评估人员,现在可以使用临床相关的技能评估工具来评估IO和LMA的插入。独创性/价值在世界范围内,无数卫生专业人员需要ALS认证和能力,迄今为止,专门为紧急情况制定的经过验证的实践和评估指南尚未在已发表的文献中得到使用。本文建议填补这一空白,并通过严格的批评指导临床教育研究人员制定有效的评估工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The development and critique of validated assessment tools for pre-hospital resuscitation skills
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of clinically credible skill practice and assessment guides for intraosseous (IO) needle insertion and laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion as two essential components of advanced life support (ALS) training. Design/methodology/approach A modified Delphi approach was used to determine expert consensus in the application of IO and LMA devices for the pre-hospital and emergency setting. Nine pre-hospital clinical specialists were recruited to participate in this Delphi study to determine consensus of clinical expert practice. Findings Two rounds were required to obtain a performance and assessment checklist for each skill. Both lists were then further modified to maximise their useability. However, the development of a “validated” checklist using a pre-determined process such as a Delphi approach is challenged. Rather, the implementation of these tools in a stated context, and analysis of the data they generate, is an essential aspect of validation which the Delphi approach does not address. Research limitations/implications Participant feedback regarding the rationale for their scores was limited in this study in order to minimise participant input and maximise completion of all rounds of the study. Further, devices used in the study may no longer be first-line choices with the advent of more modern devices including semi-automatic IO devices and LMAs which do not have inflatable cuffs. The refined checklists are able to be adapted to these newer devices. Practical implications Pre-hospital education contexts which may not have access to expert assessors who are skilled in providing global judgements now have access to clinically relevant skill-specific assessment tools for IO and LMA insertion. Originality/value Worldwide, ALS accreditation and competence is demanded of countless health professionals, and to date, validated practice and assessment guides specifically developed for the emergency setting for which they are used, are not available in the published literature. This paper proposes to fill that gap, in addition to guiding clinical education researchers in strategies to develop valid assessment tools through rigorous critique.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Emergency Services
International Journal of Emergency Services SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
29
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信