Validation of an Instrument for Real-Time Assessment of Neonatal Intubation Skills: A Randomized Controlled Simulation Study

Author:

Kuijpers Lindie J.M.K.1,Binkhorst Mathijs1ORCID,Yamada Nicole K.2,Bouwmeester Romy N.1,van Heijst Arno F.J.1,Halamek Louis P.2,Hogeveen Marije1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neonatology, Radboud University Medical Center Amalia Children's Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

2. Division of Neonatal and Developmental Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Center for Advanced Pediatric and Perinatal Education (CAPE), Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity and reliability of real-time assessment of a previously developed neonatal intubation scoring instrument (NISI). Study Design We performed a randomized controlled simulation study at a simulation-based research and training facility. Twenty-four clinicians experienced in neonatal intubation (“experts”) and 11 medical students (“novices”) performed two identical elective intubations on a neonatal patient simulator. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the intervention group, receiving predefined feedback between the two intubations, or the control group, receiving no feedback. Using the previously developed NISI, all intubations were assessed, both in real time and remotely on video. Construct validity was evaluated by (1) comparing the intubation performances, expressed as percentage scores, with and without feedback, and (2) correlating the intubation performances with the subjects' level of experience. The intrarater reliability, expressed as intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), of real-time assessment compared with video-based assessment was determined. Results The intervention group contained 18 subjects, the control group 17. Background characteristics and baseline intubation scores were comparable in both groups. The median (IQR) change in percentage scores between the first and second intubation was significantly different between the intervention and control group (11.6% [4.7–22.8%] vs. 1.4% [0.0–5.7%], respectively; p = 0.013). The 95% CI for this 10.2% difference was 2.2 to 21.4%. The subjects' experience level correlated significantly with their percentage scores (Spearman's R = 0.70; p <0.01). ICC's were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89–0.97) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89–0.97) for the first and second intubation, respectively. Conclusion Our NISI has construct validity and is reliable for real-time assessment. Key Points

Funder

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3