eprintid: 25803
rev_number: 26
eprint_status: archive
userid: 1589
dir: disk0/00/02/58/03
datestamp: 2019-02-08 12:43:19
lastmod: 2019-07-24 14:51:18
status_changed: 2019-02-08 12:43:19
type: article
metadata_visibility: show
creators_name: Ober, Julian
creators_name: Haubruck, Patrick
creators_name: Nickel, Felix
creators_name: Walker, Tilman
creators_name: Friedrich, Mirco
creators_name: Müller-Stich, Peter
creators_name: Schmidmaier, Gerhard
creators_name: Tanner, Michael C.
title: Development and validation of an objective assessment scale for chest tube insertion under ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ rating
subjects: 610
divisions: 910200
divisions: 911460
keywords: OSATS, Chest tube insertion, Education, Training, Video rating, Intermethod reliability, Interrater reliability, Construct validity, Direct rating, Indirect rating
abstract: Background: There is an increasing need for objective and validated educational concepts. This holds especially true for surgical procedures like chest tube insertion (CTI). Thus, we developed an instrument for objectification of learning successes: the assessment scale based on Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) for chest tube insertion, which is evaluated in this study. Primary endpoint was the evaluation of intermethod reliability (IM). Secondary endpoints are ‘indirect’ interrater reliability (IR) and construct validity of the scale (CV).

Methods: Every participant (N = 59) performed a CTI on a porcine thorax. Participants received three ratings (one ‘direct’ on site, two ‘indirect’ via video rating). IM compares ‘direct’ with ‘indirect’ ratings. IR was assessed between ‘indirect’ ratings. CV was investigated by subgroup analysis based on prior experience in CTI for ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ rating.

Results: We included 59 medical students to our study. IM showed moderate conformity (‘direct’ vs. ‘indirect 1’ ICC = 0.735, 95% CI: 0.554–0.843; ‘direct’ vs. ‘indirect 2’ ICC = 0.722, 95% CI 0.533–0.835) and good conformity between ‘direct’ vs. ‘average indirect’ rating (ICC = 0.764, 95% CI: 0.6–0.86). IR showed good conformity (ICC = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.707–0.91). CV was proven between subgroups in ‘direct’ (p = 0.037) and ‘indirect’ rating (p = 0.013).

Conclusion: Results for IM suggest equivalence for ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ ratings, while both IR and CV was demonstrated in both rating methods. Thus, the assessment scale seems a reliable method for rating trainees’ performances ‘directly’ as well as ‘indirectly’. It may help to objectify and facilitate the assessment of training of chest tube insertion.

- - - - - - - - - 

CORRECTION

Published online 20.02.2019 in BMC Medical Education 19 (2019), Nr. 62; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1491-4.
Following publication of the original article, the author reported that the given name and family name of all authors were swapped. The original article has been corrected.
date: 2018
publisher: BioMed Central
id_scheme: DOI
id_number: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1430-9
ppn_swb: 1666321729
own_urn: urn:nbn:de:bsz:16-heidok-258036
language: eng
bibsort: OBERJULIANDEVELOPMEN2018
full_text_status: public
publication: BMC Medical Education
volume: 18
number: 320
place_of_pub: London
pagerange: 1-9
issn: 1472-6920
citation:   Ober, Julian ; Haubruck, Patrick ; Nickel, Felix ; Walker, Tilman ; Friedrich, Mirco ; Müller-Stich, Peter ; Schmidmaier, Gerhard ; Tanner, Michael C.  (2018) Development and validation of an objective assessment scale for chest tube insertion under ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ rating.  BMC Medical Education, 18 (320).  pp. 1-9.  ISSN 1472-6920     
document_url: https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/25803/8/12909_2018_Article_1430_corrected_version.pdf
document_url: https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/25803/7/12909_2019_Article_1491.pdf