此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

Development and Validation of Metrics Lumbar Labor Epidural Catheter Placement

2015年8月26日 更新者:Karthikeyan Kallidaikurichi Srinivasan、Cork University Hospital

Protocol for Development and Validation of Metrics for Conventional Lumbar Epidural Catheter Placement for Labor Analgesia in Obstetric Patients

Procedural skills play an important role in anaesthetic expertise. More focused training and assessment of procedural skills will be needed in the future as training moves from an apprenticeship based training system to competency based assessment.

Currently various techniques exists to assess procedural skills of anaesthetist. For epidural catheter placement, task specific check list, global rating scales and cumulative sum techniques have been developed and validated. These techniques aim either for better qualitative outcome sacrificing objectivity or rely on self-reporting. A decrease in objectivity in turn hampers inter-rater reliability which is an essential component of a valid assessment model. Checklists type assessments force the developer to comprehensively characterize the procedure of interest and then validate the completed procedure characterization. This approach has been quantitatively shown to have higher assessment reliability levels compared to Likert-scale assessment.

The objective of the project is to develop and validate a comprehensive procedure characterization for labor epidural catheter placement. Another objective is to compare this new assessment tool with existing checklist and global rating scale for labor epidural to establish concurrent validity.5 A well-developed objective, validated procedure characterization serves as a master tool which has multiple applications. It helps to build a training programme for the procedure, allows providing metrics based feedback to trainees using simulator, helps to assess the performance of trainees and in future might be used as benchmark to allow competency based progression in the training.

研究概览

地位

完全的

条件

详细说明

Study part 1 After ethics committee approval a group of experts (n = 3 ) in conventional lumbar epidural catheter placement will be selected (an expert is defined as one who has performed more than 500 labor epidurals in preceding 5 year period). During a number of face-to-face meetings experts will identify, characterize and define the procedure. They will analyze task and identify units of behavior to be measured which constitute in a step-wise fashion how the procedure is optimally performed and deviations from optimal procedure performance as described previously. After informed consent from the patient and the anaesthetist performing the procedure, 2 video recordings of experts performing epidural and 2 video recordings of novices (defined as one who has done less than 50 epidurals) performing epidural will be recorded for detailed review during metric development meetings.

Study part 2 The developed metrics will be subjected to assessments of construct validity (a set of procedures for evaluating a testing instrument based on a degree to which the test terms identify the quality, ability or trait it was designed to measure) and concurrent validity (the evaluation in which the relationship between the test scores and the scores on the another instrument purporting to measure the same construct are related). We will also evaluated the inter-rater reliability of the metrics using i) proportion of agreement between raters, ii) correlation strength (using Pearson's Correlation Coefficient) and iii) Coefficient Alpha. After informed consent,10 experts (who are not a part of committee developing the metrics) each performing one or more lumbar epidural catheter placements for labor and 10 novices each performing one or more lumbar epidural catheter placements for labor will be video recorded. Two experts will review the video recording and score the performance based on checklist based system developed and compare with likert-scale checklists/global rating scale system.

研究类型

观察性的

注册 (实际的)

20

联系人和位置

本节提供了进行研究的人员的详细联系信息,以及有关进行该研究的地点的信息。

学习地点

      • Cork,Ireland、爱尔兰
        • Cork University Hospital

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

20年 至 70年 (成人、年长者)

接受健康志愿者

不

有资格学习的性别

全部

取样方法

概率样本

研究人群

Expertes and novice anaesthetist perfoming labor epidural analgesia

描述

Inclusion Criteria:

  • an expert is defined as one who has performed more than 500 labor epidurals in preceding 5 year period
  • novice (defined as one who has done less than 50 epidurals in previous 2 years)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Non consenting anaesthetist
  • Patients not consenting for video recording

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 观测模型:队列
  • 时间观点:预期

队列和干预

团体/队列
干预/治疗
Video validation group
This will include video taping of experts (defined as one who has performed more than 500 labor epidurals in preceding 5 year period) and novices (defined as one who has done less than 50 epidurals in preceeding 2 years) perfoming labor epidural
Video taping of anaesthetist (experts and novices) perfoming labor epidural.

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Construct validitiy
大体时间:WIthin 12 months post recording epidural procedure video
a set of procedures for evaluating a testing instrument based on a degree to which the test terms identify the quality, ability or trait it was designed to measure.In our study we aim to see if the metrics developed will be able to differentiate between experts and novices in performing the porcedure
WIthin 12 months post recording epidural procedure video

次要结果测量

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Concurrrent validity
大体时间:within 12 months following completion of epidural video recording
Concurrent validity is defined as a set of procedures for evaluating a testing instrument based on a degree to which the test terms identify the quality, ability or trait it was designed to measure.We aim to compare the interrater reliability of the metrics with compare with likert-scale checklists/global rating scale system developed already for the procedure.
within 12 months following completion of epidural video recording
Interrater reliability
大体时间:12 months from time of aquiring the epidural video
We will evaluate the inter-rater reliability of the metrics using i) proportion of agreement between raters, ii) correlation strength (using Pearson's Correlation Coefficient) and iii) Coefficient Alpha
12 months from time of aquiring the epidural video

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

出版物和有用的链接

负责输入研究信息的人员自愿提供这些出版物。这些可能与研究有关。

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始

2013年11月1日

初级完成 (实际的)

2014年7月1日

研究完成 (实际的)

2014年7月1日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2014年6月30日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2014年6月30日

首次发布 (估计)

2014年7月2日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (估计)

2015年8月28日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2015年8月26日

最后验证

2015年8月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

其他相关的 MeSH 术语

其他研究编号

  • ECM4(U)01/10/13

药物和器械信息、研究文件

研究美国 FDA 监管的药品

不

研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品

不

在美国制造并从美国出口的产品

不

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅