190 likes | 324 Vues
Reliability of the L eicester C linical procedure A ssessment T ool ( LCAT ), a tool to support holistic generic assessment of clinical procedure skills. RK McKinley, J Strand, L Schuwirth T Gray, T Alun-Jones, H Miller. Background. Assessment Repertoire of competence
E N D
Reliability of the Leicester Clinical procedure Assessment Tool (LCAT), a tool to support holistic generic assessment of clinical procedure skills RK McKinley, J Strand, L Schuwirth T Gray, T Alun-Jones, H Miller Keele University School of Medicine
Background • Assessment • Repertoire of competence • Micro-certification • Changing roles • Skills extension • Skills cascade • Volume • Implications for assessment Keele University School of Medicine
Instrument specification • Generic • Holistic • Multi-professional • Multi-level • Multi-modal • Enable high quality assessment: • reliable, valid, acceptable, feasible, educational impact • Nationally accredited Keele University School of Medicine
Methods • Multi stage: • Systematic review • Qualitative development • National validation • Psychometrics • Implementation Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 1: Systematic review • LCAT v1.7 Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 2: Qualitative • Focus groups • Observed assessments, debrief interviews • Trial ‘hi-fi’ OSCE • LCAT v2.5 Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 3: Delphi • National sampling frame • Recruitment • Questionnaire • Definition of consensus • Agreement • Categories: All >95% • Components: All >89% • LCAT v3.0 Keele University School of Medicine
Category Communication and working with the patient Safety Infection Prevention Procedural Competence Team working Components 9 7 6 12 4 LCAT v3.0 Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • Hi-fi OSCE • 8 stations (2X3 tracks) • Prosthetics + simulator • Venepuncture, venous cannulation, IV drugs, ABG, ♀&♂ urinary catheterisation, skin suture, ECG • ‘Prep station’ • 15 minutes + 5 feedback Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • Analysis • Used data from 1 assessor per station • Assessors not systematically assigned to stations • Variable group of assessors • Unbalanced design Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • Analysis • P (candidate) • S (stations) • A:(PS) assessors within candidates x stations • PS,e interaction candidates and stations + error Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • 46 candidates • 50 assessors • 19 medical • 27 nurses • 1 midwife • 3 HCA Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • Results: variance Keele University School of Medicine
Stage 4: Psychometrics • Results: D analysis 0.76 0.79 0.79 Keele University School of Medicine
Summary • Generic • Holistic • Multi-professional • Multi-level • Multi-modal • Enable high quality assessment: • reliable, valid, acceptable, feasible, educational impact • Nationally accredited Keele University School of Medicine
Summary • Generic • Holistic • Multi-professional • Multi-level • Multi-modal • Quality: • reliable, valid, acceptable,feasible, educational impact • Nationally accredited Keele University School of Medicine
Acknowledgements • Analysis: • Ron Hoogenboom, Cees van der Vleuten and Arno Muijtjens • Colleagues: • Linda Ward, Clinical Librarian UHL • University Hospitals of Leicester • Eastern Leicester PCT • Students and staff • University of Leicester • De Montfort University • Funding: • Nation Health Service University • Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland WDC Keele University School of Medicine