A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study using data collected at four emergency departments in England. A proportion of observations used paired observers to obtain data for inter-rater reliabilit...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2013
|
| _version_ | 1797061644647399424 |
|---|---|
| author | Flowerdew, L Gaunt, A Spedding, J Bhargava, A Brown, R Vincent, C Woloshynowych, M |
| author_facet | Flowerdew, L Gaunt, A Spedding, J Bhargava, A Brown, R Vincent, C Woloshynowych, M |
| author_sort | Flowerdew, L |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study using data collected at four emergency departments in England. A proportion of observations used paired observers to obtain data for inter-rater reliability. Data were also collected for test-retest reliability, observability of skills, mean ratings and dispersion of ratings for each skill, as well as a comparison of skill level between hospitals. Qualitative data described the range of non-technical skills exhibited by trainees and identified sources of rater error. RESULTS: 96 assessments of 43 senior trainees were completed. At a scale level, intra-class coefficients were 0.575, 0.532 and 0.419 and using mean scores were 0.824, 0.702 and 0.519. Spearman's ρ for calculating test-retest reliability was 0.70 using mean scores. All skills were observed more than 60% of the time. The skill Maintenance of Standards received the lowest mean rating (4.8 on a nine-point scale) and the highest mean was calculated for Team Building (6.0). Two skills, Supervision and Feedback and Situational Awareness-Gathering Information, had significantly different distributions of ratings across the four hospitals (p<0.04 and 0.007, respectively), and this appeared to be related to the leadership roles of trainees. CONCLUSION: This study shows the performance of the assessment tool is acceptable and provides valuable information to structure the assessment and training of non-technical skills, especially in relation to leadership. The framework of skills may be used to identify areas for development in individual trainees, as well as guide other patient safety interventions. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T20:34:11Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:321001ca-2535-48be-87c9-70aa9ca92eae |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T20:34:11Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:321001ca-2535-48be-87c9-70aa9ca92eae2022-03-26T13:11:42ZA multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:321001ca-2535-48be-87c9-70aa9ca92eaeEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2013Flowerdew, LGaunt, ASpedding, JBhargava, ABrown, RVincent, CWoloshynowych, MOBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study using data collected at four emergency departments in England. A proportion of observations used paired observers to obtain data for inter-rater reliability. Data were also collected for test-retest reliability, observability of skills, mean ratings and dispersion of ratings for each skill, as well as a comparison of skill level between hospitals. Qualitative data described the range of non-technical skills exhibited by trainees and identified sources of rater error. RESULTS: 96 assessments of 43 senior trainees were completed. At a scale level, intra-class coefficients were 0.575, 0.532 and 0.419 and using mean scores were 0.824, 0.702 and 0.519. Spearman's ρ for calculating test-retest reliability was 0.70 using mean scores. All skills were observed more than 60% of the time. The skill Maintenance of Standards received the lowest mean rating (4.8 on a nine-point scale) and the highest mean was calculated for Team Building (6.0). Two skills, Supervision and Feedback and Situational Awareness-Gathering Information, had significantly different distributions of ratings across the four hospitals (p<0.04 and 0.007, respectively), and this appeared to be related to the leadership roles of trainees. CONCLUSION: This study shows the performance of the assessment tool is acceptable and provides valuable information to structure the assessment and training of non-technical skills, especially in relation to leadership. The framework of skills may be used to identify areas for development in individual trainees, as well as guide other patient safety interventions. |
| spellingShingle | Flowerdew, L Gaunt, A Spedding, J Bhargava, A Brown, R Vincent, C Woloshynowych, M A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title | A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title_full | A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title_fullStr | A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title_full_unstemmed | A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title_short | A multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians' non-technical skills. |
| title_sort | multicentre observational study to evaluate a new tool to assess emergency physicians non technical skills |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT flowerdewl amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT gaunta amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT speddingj amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT bhargavaa amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT brownr amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT vincentc amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT woloshynowychm amulticentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT flowerdewl multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT gaunta multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT speddingj multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT bhargavaa multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT brownr multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT vincentc multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills AT woloshynowychm multicentreobservationalstudytoevaluateanewtooltoassessemergencyphysiciansnontechnicalskills |