Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

eLearning to facilitate the education and implementation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment: a novel measure of function in critical illness.

BMJ Open 2016 April 12
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of eLearning in the widespread standardised teaching, distribution and implementation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment (CPAx) tool-a validated tool to assess physical function in critically ill patients.

DESIGN: Prospective educational study. An eLearning module was developed through a conceptual framework, using the four-stage technique for skills teaching to teach clinicians how to use the CPAx. Example and test video case studies of CPAx assessments were embedded within the module. The CPAx scores for the test case studies and demographic data were recorded in a secure area of the website. Data were analysed for inter-rater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to see if an eLearning educational package facilitated consistent use of the tool. A utility and content validity questionnaire was distributed after 1 year to eLearning module registrants (n=971). This was to evaluate uptake of the CPAx in clinical practice and content validity of the CPAx from the perspective of clinical users.

SETTING: The module was distributed for use via professional forums (n=2) and direct contacts (n=95).

PARTICIPANTS: Critical care clinicians.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: ICC of the test case studies.

RESULTS: Between July and October 2014, 421 candidates from 15 countries registered for the eLearning module. The ICC for case one was 0.996 (95% CI 0.990 to 0.999; n=207). The ICC for case two was 0.988 (0.996 to 1.000; n=184). The CPAx has a strong total scale content validity index (s-CVI) of 0.94 and is well used.

CONCLUSIONS: eLearning is a useful and reliable way of teaching psychomotor skills, such as the CPAx. The CPAx is a well-used measure with high content validity rated by clinicians.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app