Reliable and Valid Assessment of Clinical Bronchoscopy Performance
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Reliable and Valid Assessment of Clinical Bronchoscopy Performance. / Konge, Lars; Larsen, Klaus Richter; Clementsen, Paul; Arendrup, Henrik; von Buchwald, Christian; Ringsted, Charlotte.
In: Respiration, Vol. 83, No. 1, 2012, p. 53-60.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Reliable and Valid Assessment of Clinical Bronchoscopy Performance
AU - Konge, Lars
AU - Larsen, Klaus Richter
AU - Clementsen, Paul
AU - Arendrup, Henrik
AU - von Buchwald, Christian
AU - Ringsted, Charlotte
N1 - Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Background: There have been several attempts to systematically assess performance in bronchoscopy. Earlier validation studies have used bronchoscopy simulators, not real-life performance in patients. Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the reliability and validity of an assessment tool aimed for the use in a clinical setting. Methods: Five junior residents, 5 senior residents and 9 consultants performed 3 bronchoscopies each. All 57 bronchoscopies were video-recorded and assessed blindly and independently by two bronchoscopy experts using the new assessment tool. Results: The interrater reliability was high, with Cronbach's a = 0.86. Assessment of 3 bronchoscopies by a single rater had a generalizability coefficient of 0.84. The correlation between experience and performance was good (Pearson correlation = 0.76). There were significant differences between the groups for all aspects of the assessment, but post hoc tests showed different discriminative abilities. Conclusions: This new tool for assessing clinical bronchoscopy performance has a high interrater reliability. One rater assessing performance of 3 bronchoscopies ensures sufficient reliability. The assessment tool demonstrated sufficient construct validity.
AB - Background: There have been several attempts to systematically assess performance in bronchoscopy. Earlier validation studies have used bronchoscopy simulators, not real-life performance in patients. Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the reliability and validity of an assessment tool aimed for the use in a clinical setting. Methods: Five junior residents, 5 senior residents and 9 consultants performed 3 bronchoscopies each. All 57 bronchoscopies were video-recorded and assessed blindly and independently by two bronchoscopy experts using the new assessment tool. Results: The interrater reliability was high, with Cronbach's a = 0.86. Assessment of 3 bronchoscopies by a single rater had a generalizability coefficient of 0.84. The correlation between experience and performance was good (Pearson correlation = 0.76). There were significant differences between the groups for all aspects of the assessment, but post hoc tests showed different discriminative abilities. Conclusions: This new tool for assessing clinical bronchoscopy performance has a high interrater reliability. One rater assessing performance of 3 bronchoscopies ensures sufficient reliability. The assessment tool demonstrated sufficient construct validity.
U2 - 10.1159/000330061
DO - 10.1159/000330061
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 21912087
VL - 83
SP - 53
EP - 60
JO - Respiration
JF - Respiration
SN - 0025-7931
IS - 1
ER -
ID: 40140570