Cargando…

Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation

BACKGROUND: To compare validity evidence for dichotomous and trichotomous versions of a neonatal intubation (NI) procedural skills checklist. METHODS: NI skills checklists were developed utilizing an existing framework. Experts were trained on scoring using dichotomous and trichotomous checklists, a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johnston, Lindsay, Sawyer, Taylor, Nishisaki, Akira, Whitfill, Travis, Ades, Anne, French, Heather, Glass, Kristen, Dadiz, Rita, Bruno, Christie, Levit, Orly, Auerbach , Marc
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9419414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36028871
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03700-4
_version_ 1784777169877073920
author Johnston, Lindsay
Sawyer, Taylor
Nishisaki, Akira
Whitfill, Travis
Ades, Anne
French, Heather
Glass, Kristen
Dadiz, Rita
Bruno, Christie
Levit, Orly
Auerbach , Marc
author_facet Johnston, Lindsay
Sawyer, Taylor
Nishisaki, Akira
Whitfill, Travis
Ades, Anne
French, Heather
Glass, Kristen
Dadiz, Rita
Bruno, Christie
Levit, Orly
Auerbach , Marc
author_sort Johnston, Lindsay
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To compare validity evidence for dichotomous and trichotomous versions of a neonatal intubation (NI) procedural skills checklist. METHODS: NI skills checklists were developed utilizing an existing framework. Experts were trained on scoring using dichotomous and trichotomous checklists, and rated recordings of 23 providers performing simulated NI. Videolaryngoscope recordings of glottic exposure were evaluated using Cormack-Lehane (CL) and Percent of Glottic Opening scales. Internal consistency and reliability of both checklists were analyzed, and correlations between checklist scores, airway visualization, entrustable professional activities (EPA), and global skills assessment (GSA) were calculated. RESULTS: During rater training, raters gave significantly higher scores on better provider performance in standardized videos (both p < 0.001). When utilized to evaluate study participants’ simulated NI attempts, both dichotomous and trichotomous checklist scores demonstrated very good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.868 and 0.840, respectively). Inter-rater reliability was higher for dichotomous than trichotomous checklists [Fleiss kappa of 0.642 and 0.576, respectively (p < 0.001)]. Sum checklist scores were significantly different among providers in different disciplines (p < 0.001, dichotomous and trichotomous). Sum dichotomous checklist scores correlated more strongly than trichotomous scores with GSA and CL grades. Sum dichotomous and trichotomous checklist scores correlated similarly well with EPA. CONCLUSIONS: Neither dichotomous or trichotomous checklist was superior in discriminating provider NI skill when compared to GSA, EPA, or airway visualization assessment. Sum scores from dichotomous checklists may provide sufficient information to assess procedural competence, but trichotomous checklists may permit more granular feedback to learners and educators. The checklist selected may vary with assessment needs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03700-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9419414
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94194142022-08-28 Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation Johnston, Lindsay Sawyer, Taylor Nishisaki, Akira Whitfill, Travis Ades, Anne French, Heather Glass, Kristen Dadiz, Rita Bruno, Christie Levit, Orly Auerbach , Marc BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: To compare validity evidence for dichotomous and trichotomous versions of a neonatal intubation (NI) procedural skills checklist. METHODS: NI skills checklists were developed utilizing an existing framework. Experts were trained on scoring using dichotomous and trichotomous checklists, and rated recordings of 23 providers performing simulated NI. Videolaryngoscope recordings of glottic exposure were evaluated using Cormack-Lehane (CL) and Percent of Glottic Opening scales. Internal consistency and reliability of both checklists were analyzed, and correlations between checklist scores, airway visualization, entrustable professional activities (EPA), and global skills assessment (GSA) were calculated. RESULTS: During rater training, raters gave significantly higher scores on better provider performance in standardized videos (both p < 0.001). When utilized to evaluate study participants’ simulated NI attempts, both dichotomous and trichotomous checklist scores demonstrated very good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.868 and 0.840, respectively). Inter-rater reliability was higher for dichotomous than trichotomous checklists [Fleiss kappa of 0.642 and 0.576, respectively (p < 0.001)]. Sum checklist scores were significantly different among providers in different disciplines (p < 0.001, dichotomous and trichotomous). Sum dichotomous checklist scores correlated more strongly than trichotomous scores with GSA and CL grades. Sum dichotomous and trichotomous checklist scores correlated similarly well with EPA. CONCLUSIONS: Neither dichotomous or trichotomous checklist was superior in discriminating provider NI skill when compared to GSA, EPA, or airway visualization assessment. Sum scores from dichotomous checklists may provide sufficient information to assess procedural competence, but trichotomous checklists may permit more granular feedback to learners and educators. The checklist selected may vary with assessment needs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03700-4. BioMed Central 2022-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9419414/ /pubmed/36028871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03700-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Johnston, Lindsay
Sawyer, Taylor
Nishisaki, Akira
Whitfill, Travis
Ades, Anne
French, Heather
Glass, Kristen
Dadiz, Rita
Bruno, Christie
Levit, Orly
Auerbach , Marc
Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title_full Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title_fullStr Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title_short Comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
title_sort comparison of a dichotomous versus trichotomous checklist for neonatal intubation
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9419414/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36028871
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03700-4
work_keys_str_mv AT johnstonlindsay comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT sawyertaylor comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT nishisakiakira comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT whitfilltravis comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT adesanne comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT frenchheather comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT glasskristen comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT dadizrita comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT brunochristie comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT levitorly comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation
AT auerbachmarc comparisonofadichotomousversustrichotomouschecklistforneonatalintubation