Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills
Abstract Purpose The Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument (IPPI) consists of clinical scenarios in which bench-top models are positioned to simulated patients. Trainees are required to perform technical skills while engaging with the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whethe...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of surgery 2009, Vol.197 (1), p.96-101 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 101 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 96 |
| container_title | The American journal of surgery |
| container_volume | 197 |
| creator | LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D Tabak, Diana Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D Nestel, Debra, Ph.D MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed |
| description | Abstract Purpose The Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument (IPPI) consists of clinical scenarios in which bench-top models are positioned to simulated patients. Trainees are required to perform technical skills while engaging with the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an IPPI format examination could discriminate between different levels of trainees. Methods Sixteen fourth-year medical students and 16 first-year surgery residents participated in 4 IPPI scenarios. Videotaped performances were scored by 2 blinded independent clinician raters on previously validated instruments: checklist of technical skills, Global Rating Scale of technical skills, and communication scale. We conducted separate mixed design analyses of variance (level × cases) on the 3 scales. Results Residents performed better than medical students on the checklist (74% vs 60%, P < .05), the Global Rating Scale of technical skills (75% vs 56%, P < .01), and the coherence communication subscale (79% vs 69%, P < .05). Conclusions An IPPI examination discriminated between students' and residents' technical skills and coherence in communication skills. It also highlighted a potential gap in the training of residents' communication skills. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.08.011 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66744073</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0002961008007046</els_id><sourcerecordid>66744073</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-e8ba27db41a281f6ccee9da5b8d88b9f6e6be35267e40e59787beba1856157533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkl2L1TAQhoMo7nH1JygF0bseM23z0RtFFr9gQUG98Cqk6XQ33X6czaTC-femnuLC3ggDYcgzL2_eDGPPge-Bg3zT7-3Y0xKu9gXner8WwAO2A63qHLQuH7Id57zIawn8jD0h6lMLUJWP2RnUSaMQfMd-faOju55HjMG77BDmA4bokbK5y-yU-SniVbAR28wSIdGIU1zvIrrryTs7JKrN3DyOy9pGP08Z3fhhoKfsUWcHwmfbec5-fvzw4-Jzfvn105eL95e5q5SMOerGFqptKrCFhk46h1i3VjS61bqpO4mywVIUUmHFUdRKqwYbC1pIEEqU5Tl7fdJN5m8XpGhGTw6HwU44L2SkVFXF1Qq-vAf28xKm5M1AXVRacCFUosSJcmEmCtiZQ_CjDUcD3KzJm95syZs1ebMWQJp7sakvzYjt3dQWdQJebYCllFsX7OQ8_eMKXiupdZ24dycOU2i_PQZDzuPksPUBXTTt7P9r5e09BTf4v591g0eku1cbKgw339c1WbeEa84Vr2T5B_suuhU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1924850557</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D ; Tabak, Diana ; Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D ; Nestel, Debra, Ph.D ; MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed ; Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</creator><creatorcontrib>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D ; Tabak, Diana ; Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D ; Nestel, Debra, Ph.D ; MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed ; Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Purpose The Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument (IPPI) consists of clinical scenarios in which bench-top models are positioned to simulated patients. Trainees are required to perform technical skills while engaging with the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an IPPI format examination could discriminate between different levels of trainees. Methods Sixteen fourth-year medical students and 16 first-year surgery residents participated in 4 IPPI scenarios. Videotaped performances were scored by 2 blinded independent clinician raters on previously validated instruments: checklist of technical skills, Global Rating Scale of technical skills, and communication scale. We conducted separate mixed design analyses of variance (level × cases) on the 3 scales. Results Residents performed better than medical students on the checklist (74% vs 60%, P < .05), the Global Rating Scale of technical skills (75% vs 56%, P < .01), and the coherence communication subscale (79% vs 69%, P < .05). Conclusions An IPPI examination discriminated between students' and residents' technical skills and coherence in communication skills. It also highlighted a potential gap in the training of residents' communication skills.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9610</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1883</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.08.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19101250</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJSUAB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data ; Clinical medicine ; Communication ; Communication skills ; Computer simulation ; Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods ; General aspects ; General Surgery - education ; Internship and Residency - methods ; Medical sciences ; Medical students ; Observer Variation ; Patient Simulation ; Patients ; Penicillin ; Performance assessments ; Psychometrics ; Quantitative psychology ; Simulation ; Skills ; Students ; Surgeons ; Surgery ; Technical skills ; Variance analysis</subject><ispartof>The American journal of surgery, 2009, Vol.197 (1), p.96-101</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2009 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Jan 1, 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-e8ba27db41a281f6ccee9da5b8d88b9f6e6be35267e40e59787beba1856157533</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-e8ba27db41a281f6ccee9da5b8d88b9f6e6be35267e40e59787beba1856157533</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1924850557?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,4024,27923,27924,27925,45995,64385,64387,64389,72469</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20976889$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19101250$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tabak, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nestel, Debra, Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</creatorcontrib><title>Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills</title><title>The American journal of surgery</title><addtitle>Am J Surg</addtitle><description>Abstract Purpose The Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument (IPPI) consists of clinical scenarios in which bench-top models are positioned to simulated patients. Trainees are required to perform technical skills while engaging with the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an IPPI format examination could discriminate between different levels of trainees. Methods Sixteen fourth-year medical students and 16 first-year surgery residents participated in 4 IPPI scenarios. Videotaped performances were scored by 2 blinded independent clinician raters on previously validated instruments: checklist of technical skills, Global Rating Scale of technical skills, and communication scale. We conducted separate mixed design analyses of variance (level × cases) on the 3 scales. Results Residents performed better than medical students on the checklist (74% vs 60%, P < .05), the Global Rating Scale of technical skills (75% vs 56%, P < .01), and the coherence communication subscale (79% vs 69%, P < .05). Conclusions An IPPI examination discriminated between students' and residents' technical skills and coherence in communication skills. It also highlighted a potential gap in the training of residents' communication skills.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Communication skills</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>General Surgery - education</subject><subject>Internship and Residency - methods</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medical students</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Patient Simulation</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Penicillin</subject><subject>Performance assessments</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Skills</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Technical skills</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><issn>0002-9610</issn><issn>1879-1883</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkl2L1TAQhoMo7nH1JygF0bseM23z0RtFFr9gQUG98Cqk6XQ33X6czaTC-femnuLC3ggDYcgzL2_eDGPPge-Bg3zT7-3Y0xKu9gXner8WwAO2A63qHLQuH7Id57zIawn8jD0h6lMLUJWP2RnUSaMQfMd-faOju55HjMG77BDmA4bokbK5y-yU-SniVbAR28wSIdGIU1zvIrrryTs7JKrN3DyOy9pGP08Z3fhhoKfsUWcHwmfbec5-fvzw4-Jzfvn105eL95e5q5SMOerGFqptKrCFhk46h1i3VjS61bqpO4mywVIUUmHFUdRKqwYbC1pIEEqU5Tl7fdJN5m8XpGhGTw6HwU44L2SkVFXF1Qq-vAf28xKm5M1AXVRacCFUosSJcmEmCtiZQ_CjDUcD3KzJm95syZs1ebMWQJp7sakvzYjt3dQWdQJebYCllFsX7OQ8_eMKXiupdZ24dycOU2i_PQZDzuPksPUBXTTt7P9r5e09BTf4v591g0eku1cbKgw339c1WbeEa84Vr2T5B_suuhU</recordid><startdate>2009</startdate><enddate>2009</enddate><creator>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D</creator><creator>Tabak, Diana</creator><creator>Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D</creator><creator>Nestel, Debra, Ph.D</creator><creator>MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed</creator><creator>Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2009</creationdate><title>Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills</title><author>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D ; Tabak, Diana ; Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D ; Nestel, Debra, Ph.D ; MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed ; Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c476t-e8ba27db41a281f6ccee9da5b8d88b9f6e6be35267e40e59787beba1856157533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Communication skills</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>General Surgery - education</topic><topic>Internship and Residency - methods</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medical students</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Patient Simulation</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Penicillin</topic><topic>Performance assessments</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Skills</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Technical skills</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tabak, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nestel, Debra, Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>LeBlanc, Vicki R., Ph.D</au><au>Tabak, Diana</au><au>Kneebone, Roger, B.M., Ch.B., Ph.D</au><au>Nestel, Debra, Ph.D</au><au>MacRae, Helen, M.D., M.Ed</au><au>Moulton, Carol-Anne, M.D., M.Ed</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Surg</addtitle><date>2009</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>197</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>96</spage><epage>101</epage><pages>96-101</pages><issn>0002-9610</issn><eissn>1879-1883</eissn><coden>AJSUAB</coden><abstract>Abstract Purpose The Integrated Procedural Performance Instrument (IPPI) consists of clinical scenarios in which bench-top models are positioned to simulated patients. Trainees are required to perform technical skills while engaging with the patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an IPPI format examination could discriminate between different levels of trainees. Methods Sixteen fourth-year medical students and 16 first-year surgery residents participated in 4 IPPI scenarios. Videotaped performances were scored by 2 blinded independent clinician raters on previously validated instruments: checklist of technical skills, Global Rating Scale of technical skills, and communication scale. We conducted separate mixed design analyses of variance (level × cases) on the 3 scales. Results Residents performed better than medical students on the checklist (74% vs 60%, P < .05), the Global Rating Scale of technical skills (75% vs 56%, P < .01), and the coherence communication subscale (79% vs 69%, P < .05). Conclusions An IPPI examination discriminated between students' and residents' technical skills and coherence in communication skills. It also highlighted a potential gap in the training of residents' communication skills.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19101250</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.08.011</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0002-9610 |
| ispartof | The American journal of surgery, 2009, Vol.197 (1), p.96-101 |
| issn | 0002-9610 1879-1883 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66744073 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present); ProQuest Central UK/Ireland |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data Clinical medicine Communication Communication skills Computer simulation Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods General aspects General Surgery - education Internship and Residency - methods Medical sciences Medical students Observer Variation Patient Simulation Patients Penicillin Performance assessments Psychometrics Quantitative psychology Simulation Skills Students Surgeons Surgery Technical skills Variance analysis |
| title | Psychometric properties of an integrated assessment of technical and communication skills |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T04%3A35%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Psychometric%20properties%20of%20an%20integrated%20assessment%20of%20technical%20and%20communication%20skills&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=LeBlanc,%20Vicki%20R.,%20Ph.D&rft.date=2009&rft.volume=197&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=96&rft.epage=101&rft.pages=96-101&rft.issn=0002-9610&rft.eissn=1879-1883&rft.coden=AJSUAB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.08.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66744073%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1924850557&rft_id=info:pmid/19101250&rft_els_id=S0002961008007046&rfr_iscdi=true |