Validation of a clinical assessment tool for spinal anaesthesia

Dorothy Breen, L. Bogár, P. Heigl, J. Rittberger, G. D. Shorten

Research output: Article

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There is a need for a procedure-specific means of assessment of clinical performance in anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to devise a tool for assessing the performance of spinal anaesthesia, which has both content and construct validity. Methods: The clinical assessment tool was generated using a focus group discussion of practicing anaesthetists. The tool comprised three components: a checklist of 11 pre-defined errors, two time intervals and a six-item global rating scale (GRS). Thirty-one anaesthetists at three different levels of experience underwent testing using the clinical assessment tool:novice (n=10), intermediate (n=10) andexpert (n=11). Results: The error checklist and GRS scores but not the time intervals were significantly different between the three groups (P

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)653-657
Number of pages5
JournalActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
Volume55
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - júl. 2011

Fingerprint

Spinal Anesthesia
Checklist
Focus Groups
Anesthesia
Anesthetists

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Validation of a clinical assessment tool for spinal anaesthesia. / Breen, Dorothy; Bogár, L.; Heigl, P.; Rittberger, J.; Shorten, G. D.

In: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, Vol. 55, No. 6, 07.2011, p. 653-657.

Research output: Article

Breen, Dorothy ; Bogár, L. ; Heigl, P. ; Rittberger, J. ; Shorten, G. D. / Validation of a clinical assessment tool for spinal anaesthesia. In: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2011 ; Vol. 55, No. 6. pp. 653-657.
@article{6d10757629d5476b84bcaaabe980e33f,
title = "Validation of a clinical assessment tool for spinal anaesthesia",
abstract = "Background: There is a need for a procedure-specific means of assessment of clinical performance in anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to devise a tool for assessing the performance of spinal anaesthesia, which has both content and construct validity. Methods: The clinical assessment tool was generated using a focus group discussion of practicing anaesthetists. The tool comprised three components: a checklist of 11 pre-defined errors, two time intervals and a six-item global rating scale (GRS). Thirty-one anaesthetists at three different levels of experience underwent testing using the clinical assessment tool:novice (n=10), intermediate (n=10) andexpert (n=11). Results: The error checklist and GRS scores but not the time intervals were significantly different between the three groups (P",
author = "Dorothy Breen and L. Bog{\'a}r and P. Heigl and J. Rittberger and Shorten, {G. D.}",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02433.x",
language = "English",
volume = "55",
pages = "653--657",
journal = "Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-5172",
publisher = "Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of a clinical assessment tool for spinal anaesthesia

AU - Breen, Dorothy

AU - Bogár, L.

AU - Heigl, P.

AU - Rittberger, J.

AU - Shorten, G. D.

PY - 2011/7

Y1 - 2011/7

N2 - Background: There is a need for a procedure-specific means of assessment of clinical performance in anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to devise a tool for assessing the performance of spinal anaesthesia, which has both content and construct validity. Methods: The clinical assessment tool was generated using a focus group discussion of practicing anaesthetists. The tool comprised three components: a checklist of 11 pre-defined errors, two time intervals and a six-item global rating scale (GRS). Thirty-one anaesthetists at three different levels of experience underwent testing using the clinical assessment tool:novice (n=10), intermediate (n=10) andexpert (n=11). Results: The error checklist and GRS scores but not the time intervals were significantly different between the three groups (P

AB - Background: There is a need for a procedure-specific means of assessment of clinical performance in anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to devise a tool for assessing the performance of spinal anaesthesia, which has both content and construct validity. Methods: The clinical assessment tool was generated using a focus group discussion of practicing anaesthetists. The tool comprised three components: a checklist of 11 pre-defined errors, two time intervals and a six-item global rating scale (GRS). Thirty-one anaesthetists at three different levels of experience underwent testing using the clinical assessment tool:novice (n=10), intermediate (n=10) andexpert (n=11). Results: The error checklist and GRS scores but not the time intervals were significantly different between the three groups (P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79959812888&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79959812888&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02433.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02433.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21480830

AN - SCOPUS:79959812888

VL - 55

SP - 653

EP - 657

JO - Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-5172

IS - 6

ER -