We have located links that may give you full text access.
Development of a Multiple-Choice Test for Novice Anesthesia Residents to Evaluate Knowledge Related to Management of General Anesthesia for Urgent Cesarean Delivery.
Background: Teaching trainees the knowledge and skills to perform general anesthesia (GA) for cesarean delivery (CD) requires innovative strategies, as they may never manage such cases in training. We used a multistage design process to create a criterion-referenced multiple-choice test as an assessment tool to evaluate CA1's knowledge related to this scenario.
Methods: Three faculty created 33 questions, categorized as: (1) physiologic changes of pregnancy (PCP), (2) pharmacology (PHA), (3) anesthetic implications of pregnancy (AIP), and (4) crisis resource management principles (CRM). A Delphi process (3 rounds) provided content validation. In round 1, experts (n = 15) ranked questions on a 7-point Likert scale. Questions ranked ≥ 5 in importance by ≥ 70% of experts were retained. Five questions were eliminated, several were revised, and 1 added. In round 2, consensus (N = 14) was reached in all except 7 questions. In round 3 (N = 14), all questions stabilized. A pilot test of the 29-question instrument evaluating internal consistency, reliability, convergent validity, and item analysis was conducted with the July CA1 classes at our institution after a lecture on GA for CD (n = 26, "instructed group") and another institution with no lecture (n = 26, "uninstructed group"), CA2s (N = 17), and attendings (N = 10).
Results: Acceptable internal consistency and reliability was demonstrated (ρ = 0.67). Convergent validity coefficients between the CA1 uninstructed and instructed group suggested theoretical meaningfulness of the 4 sub-scales: PCP correlated at 0.29 with PHA, 0.35 with CRM, and 0.25 with AIP. PHA correlated with CRM and AIP at 0.23 and 0.28, respectively. The correlation between CRM and AIP was 0.29.
Conclusion: The test produces moderately reliable scores to assess CA1s' knowledge related to GA for urgent CD.
Methods: Three faculty created 33 questions, categorized as: (1) physiologic changes of pregnancy (PCP), (2) pharmacology (PHA), (3) anesthetic implications of pregnancy (AIP), and (4) crisis resource management principles (CRM). A Delphi process (3 rounds) provided content validation. In round 1, experts (n = 15) ranked questions on a 7-point Likert scale. Questions ranked ≥ 5 in importance by ≥ 70% of experts were retained. Five questions were eliminated, several were revised, and 1 added. In round 2, consensus (N = 14) was reached in all except 7 questions. In round 3 (N = 14), all questions stabilized. A pilot test of the 29-question instrument evaluating internal consistency, reliability, convergent validity, and item analysis was conducted with the July CA1 classes at our institution after a lecture on GA for CD (n = 26, "instructed group") and another institution with no lecture (n = 26, "uninstructed group"), CA2s (N = 17), and attendings (N = 10).
Results: Acceptable internal consistency and reliability was demonstrated (ρ = 0.67). Convergent validity coefficients between the CA1 uninstructed and instructed group suggested theoretical meaningfulness of the 4 sub-scales: PCP correlated at 0.29 with PHA, 0.35 with CRM, and 0.25 with AIP. PHA correlated with CRM and AIP at 0.23 and 0.28, respectively. The correlation between CRM and AIP was 0.29.
Conclusion: The test produces moderately reliable scores to assess CA1s' knowledge related to GA for urgent CD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
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
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