家庭医学门诊妇女保健程序技能绩效评定工具的研制

IF 3.2 3区管理学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Education and Training Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1370/afm.21.s1.3477

Parisa Rezaiefar, D. Archibald, Nisha Waqas, S. Humphrey-Murto

{"title":"家庭医学门诊妇女保健程序技能绩效评定工具的研制","authors":"Parisa Rezaiefar, D. Archibald, Nisha Waqas, S. Humphrey-Murto","doi":"10.1370/afm.21.s1.3477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Women's health procedures are essential services few family medicine (FM) residents provide upon graduation. Improving training and confirming these skills' acquisition is crucial for safe health care delivery. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop and provide preliminary validity evidence for two performance rating instruments for intrauterine device insertion, endometrial biopsy, punch biopsy of the vulva, and routine pessary care. Study Design: Modified Delphi consensus and descriptive prospective study. Setting: Nine Canadian universities. Participants: Academic family physicians and gynaecologists. Instrument/Intervention: Procedure-specific checklists were developed based on empirical evidence and content expert opinion. Academic family physicians (n=12) and gynecologists (n=4)participated in a modified Delphi to finalize the items for the checklists. Consensus was defined as a priori. A previously validated global rating scale was modified to accommodate women's health procedures in ambulatory settings. Academic family physicians (n=19) piloted the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales. They rated two videos (one first-year and one second-year FM resident) performing the four procedures while blinded to their level of training. They also evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of two instruments. Average scores for the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales for each procedure were calculated and correlated with the year of training for each procedure. Results: Consensus on items for the final checklists was reached after two rounds of a modified Delphi. Although Procedure-specific checklists' scores did not correlate with the level of training, the global rating scales' scores did. Both instruments received high average overall scores (31/36 ) for ease of use and acceptability for all four procedures. Conclusion: We designed performance rating instruments for four women's health procedures and provided evidence for content validity through rigorous checklist development informed by the literature and a panel of Canadian experts. Piloting the instruments demonstrated validity for the response process, with raters","PeriodicalId":47994,"journal":{"name":"Education and Training","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of Performance Rating Instruments for Ambulatory Women’s Health Procedural Skills in Family Medicine\",\"authors\":\"Parisa Rezaiefar, D. Archibald, Nisha Waqas, S. Humphrey-Murto\",\"doi\":\"10.1370/afm.21.s1.3477\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Women's health procedures are essential services few family medicine (FM) residents provide upon graduation. Improving training and confirming these skills' acquisition is crucial for safe health care delivery. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop and provide preliminary validity evidence for two performance rating instruments for intrauterine device insertion, endometrial biopsy, punch biopsy of the vulva, and routine pessary care. Study Design: Modified Delphi consensus and descriptive prospective study. Setting: Nine Canadian universities. Participants: Academic family physicians and gynaecologists. Instrument/Intervention: Procedure-specific checklists were developed based on empirical evidence and content expert opinion. Academic family physicians (n=12) and gynecologists (n=4)participated in a modified Delphi to finalize the items for the checklists. Consensus was defined as a priori. A previously validated global rating scale was modified to accommodate women's health procedures in ambulatory settings. Academic family physicians (n=19) piloted the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales. They rated two videos (one first-year and one second-year FM resident) performing the four procedures while blinded to their level of training. They also evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of two instruments. Average scores for the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales for each procedure were calculated and correlated with the year of training for each procedure. Results: Consensus on items for the final checklists was reached after two rounds of a modified Delphi. Although Procedure-specific checklists' scores did not correlate with the level of training, the global rating scales' scores did. Both instruments received high average overall scores (31/36 ) for ease of use and acceptability for all four procedures. Conclusion: We designed performance rating instruments for four women's health procedures and provided evidence for content validity through rigorous checklist development informed by the literature and a panel of Canadian experts. Piloting the instruments demonstrated validity for the response process, with raters\",\"PeriodicalId\":47994,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Education and Training\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Education and Training\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.21.s1.3477\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Training","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.21.s1.3477","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:妇女保健程序是基本服务，少数家庭医学(FM)居民毕业后提供。改进培训并确认获得这些技能对于安全提供卫生保健至关重要。目的:为宫内节育器植入术、子宫内膜活检、外阴穿刺活检及子宫常规护理提供两种性能评定仪的初步有效性证据。研究设计:修正德尔菲共识和描述性前瞻性研究。环境:加拿大九所大学。参与者:学术家庭医生和妇科医生。仪器/干预措施:根据经验证据和内容专家意见制定程序特定检查清单。学术家庭医生(n=12)和妇科医生(n=4)参与了修改后的德尔菲问卷，以确定检查清单的项目。共识被定义为先验的。修改了先前有效的全球评定量表，以适应门诊环境中的妇女保健程序。学术家庭医生(n=19)试点特定程序检查表和全球评分量表。他们对两段视频进行评分(一段是一年级FM住院医生，另一段是二年级FM住院医生)，他们在不知道自己的训练水平的情况下执行这四种程序。他们还评价了两种工具的易用性和可接受性。计算每个程序的特定程序检查表和全局评定量表的平均分数，并将其与每个程序的培训年份相关联。结果:经过两轮修改后的德尔菲，对最终清单的项目达成共识。虽然特定程序检查表的分数与培训水平无关，但全球评定量表的分数与培训水平相关。这两种仪器在所有四个程序的易用性和可接受性方面获得了很高的平均总分(31/36)。结论:我们设计了四种妇女保健程序的性能评级工具，并通过文献和加拿大专家小组提供的严格的检查表开发为内容效度提供证据。与评分者一起，试用这些工具证明了响应过程的有效性

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Development of Performance Rating Instruments for Ambulatory Women’s Health Procedural Skills in Family Medicine

Context: Women's health procedures are essential services few family medicine (FM) residents provide upon graduation. Improving training and confirming these skills' acquisition is crucial for safe health care delivery. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop and provide preliminary validity evidence for two performance rating instruments for intrauterine device insertion, endometrial biopsy, punch biopsy of the vulva, and routine pessary care. Study Design: Modified Delphi consensus and descriptive prospective study. Setting: Nine Canadian universities. Participants: Academic family physicians and gynaecologists. Instrument/Intervention: Procedure-specific checklists were developed based on empirical evidence and content expert opinion. Academic family physicians (n=12) and gynecologists (n=4)participated in a modified Delphi to finalize the items for the checklists. Consensus was defined as a priori. A previously validated global rating scale was modified to accommodate women's health procedures in ambulatory settings. Academic family physicians (n=19) piloted the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales. They rated two videos (one first-year and one second-year FM resident) performing the four procedures while blinded to their level of training. They also evaluated the ease of use and acceptability of two instruments. Average scores for the procedure-specific checklists and the global rating scales for each procedure were calculated and correlated with the year of training for each procedure. Results: Consensus on items for the final checklists was reached after two rounds of a modified Delphi. Although Procedure-specific checklists' scores did not correlate with the level of training, the global rating scales' scores did. Both instruments received high average overall scores (31/36 ) for ease of use and acceptability for all four procedures. Conclusion: We designed performance rating instruments for four women's health procedures and provided evidence for content validity through rigorous checklist development informed by the literature and a panel of Canadian experts. Piloting the instruments demonstrated validity for the response process, with raters

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

Education and Training EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

13.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Education + Training addresses the increasingly complex relationships between education, training and employment and the impact of these relationships on national and global labour markets. The journal gives specific consideration to young people, looking at how the transition from school/college to employment is achieved and how the nature of partnerships between the worlds of education and work continues to evolve. The journal explores vocationalism in learning and efforts to address employability within the curriculum, together with coverage of innovative themes and initiatives within vocational education and training. The journal is read by policy makers, educators and academics working in a wide range of fields including education, learning and skills development, enterprise and entrepreneurship education and training, induction and career development. Coverage: Managing the transition from school/college to work New initiatives in post 16 vocational education and training Education-Business partnerships and collaboration Links between education and industry The graduate labour market Work experience and placements The recruitment, induction and development of school leavers and graduates Young person employability and career development E learning in further and higher education Research news Reviews of recent publications.