Cargando…
Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances
CONTEXT: Checklists are commonly used in the assessment of procedural competence. However, on most checklists, high scores are often unable to rule out incompetence as the commission of a few serious procedural errors typically results in only a minimal reduction in performance score. We hypothesise...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4584502/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26383072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/medu.12809 |
_version_ | 1782392000684752896 |
---|---|
author | Ma, Irene W Y Pugh, Debra Mema, Briseida Brindle, Mary E Cooke, Lara Stromer, Julie N |
author_facet | Ma, Irene W Y Pugh, Debra Mema, Briseida Brindle, Mary E Cooke, Lara Stromer, Julie N |
author_sort | Ma, Irene W Y |
collection | PubMed |
description | CONTEXT: Checklists are commonly used in the assessment of procedural competence. However, on most checklists, high scores are often unable to rule out incompetence as the commission of a few serious procedural errors typically results in only a minimal reduction in performance score. We hypothesised that checklists constructed based on procedural errors may be better at identifying incompetence. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the efficacy of an error-focused checklist and a conventionally constructed checklist in identifying procedural incompetence. METHODS: We constructed a 15-item error-focused checklist for lumbar puncture (LP) based on input from 13 experts in four Canadian academic centres, using a modified Delphi approach, over three rounds of survey. Ratings of 18 video-recorded performances of LP on simulators using the error-focused tool were compared with ratings obtained using a published conventional 21-item checklist. Competence/incompetence decisions were based on global assessment. Diagnostic accuracy was estimated using the area under the curve (AUC) in receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: The accuracy of the conventional checklist in identifying incompetence was low (AUC 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00–0.28) in comparison with that of the error-focused checklist (AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.67–1.00). The internal consistency of the error-focused checklist was lower than that of the conventional checklist (α = 0.35 and α = 0.79, respectively). The inter-rater reliability of both tools was high (conventional checklist: intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.99, 95% CI 0.98–1.00; error-focused checklist: ICC 0.92, 95% CI 0.68–0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, the conventional checklist was less accurate at identifying procedural incompetence. For assessments in which it is important to identify procedural incompetence, we recommend the use of an error-focused checklist. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4584502 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45845022015-10-02 Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances Ma, Irene W Y Pugh, Debra Mema, Briseida Brindle, Mary E Cooke, Lara Stromer, Julie N Med Educ Assessing and Enhancing Competence CONTEXT: Checklists are commonly used in the assessment of procedural competence. However, on most checklists, high scores are often unable to rule out incompetence as the commission of a few serious procedural errors typically results in only a minimal reduction in performance score. We hypothesised that checklists constructed based on procedural errors may be better at identifying incompetence. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the efficacy of an error-focused checklist and a conventionally constructed checklist in identifying procedural incompetence. METHODS: We constructed a 15-item error-focused checklist for lumbar puncture (LP) based on input from 13 experts in four Canadian academic centres, using a modified Delphi approach, over three rounds of survey. Ratings of 18 video-recorded performances of LP on simulators using the error-focused tool were compared with ratings obtained using a published conventional 21-item checklist. Competence/incompetence decisions were based on global assessment. Diagnostic accuracy was estimated using the area under the curve (AUC) in receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS: The accuracy of the conventional checklist in identifying incompetence was low (AUC 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00–0.28) in comparison with that of the error-focused checklist (AUC 0.85, 95% CI 0.67–1.00). The internal consistency of the error-focused checklist was lower than that of the conventional checklist (α = 0.35 and α = 0.79, respectively). The inter-rater reliability of both tools was high (conventional checklist: intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.99, 95% CI 0.98–1.00; error-focused checklist: ICC 0.92, 95% CI 0.68–0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher internal consistency and inter-rater reliability, the conventional checklist was less accurate at identifying procedural incompetence. For assessments in which it is important to identify procedural incompetence, we recommend the use of an error-focused checklist. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2015-10 2015-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4584502/ /pubmed/26383072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/medu.12809 Text en © 2015 The Authors Medical Education Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Assessing and Enhancing Competence Ma, Irene W Y Pugh, Debra Mema, Briseida Brindle, Mary E Cooke, Lara Stromer, Julie N Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title | Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title_full | Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title_fullStr | Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title_short | Use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
title_sort | use of an error-focused checklist to identify incompetence in lumbar puncture performances |
topic | Assessing and Enhancing Competence |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4584502/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26383072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/medu.12809 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mairenewy useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances AT pughdebra useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances AT memabriseida useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances AT brindlemarye useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances AT cookelara useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances AT stromerjulien useofanerrorfocusedchecklisttoidentifyincompetenceinlumbarpunctureperformances |